Slashdot Mirror


Half-Life 2 - A Linux User's Lament

jvm writes "If you're a gamer with a pulse, you've probably heard about the impending release of Valve's Half-Life 2. As a gamer and a Linux user, I always get a little stirred up about the whole Half-Life situation, where we have a dedicated server but no client. So here's my reflection on the sad situation, past and present. How will the rest of the Linux gaming community react to the release of Half-Life 2? Boot into Windows? Wait for WINE or WineX support? Get the Xbox version? With so many Half-Life servers running on Linux, will the same be true for Half-Life 2?"

792 comments

  1. I have a lament too by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 5, Funny

    GET BACK TO WORK YOU LAZY ENGINEERS!

    *caps is like yelling so you have to offset it with lowercase text*

    1. Re:I have a lament too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The expectation is correct. The Linux guys are the engineers, and M$ earns their money with gamblers...

    2. Re:I have a lament too by randyest · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hmm, I guess I'm supposed to talk about Linux and open source and some ideology or another. I tried to come up with something really inspirational and altruistic-like. But I felt so dirty lying like that.

      So, I'll admit it: I'm going to play Half-Life 2, on WindowsXP, the day it is released. And, I bet, the next day, and the next day, and the next day, . . .

      --
      everything in moderation
    3. Re:I have a lament too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is unfortunate that you (and many others) will sacrifice your principles for a game.

      Please, everyone, think about what you're giving up by booting windows. Purity, integrity and your future, nothing less. Yes, even if you copied that windows CD and Gate$ gets no money from your HL2 experience. What you're doing is sending a message to game authors that it's OK to ignore Linux forever.

      To cynical types this may look a bit over the top. But it's a way of life.

    4. Re:I have a lament too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right. That would be why Autocad, Protel, Pro/Engineer and so many other packages absolutely required to be a professional engineer are available for Windows BUT NOT LINUX. I think you meant to say that the Linux guys are the wannabe engineers, and M$ earns their money with people who are gainfully employed.

      Fool.

    5. Re:I have a lament too by Sivar · · Score: 1

      Yes, but... It's Halflife 2!

      --
      Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes. --E. W. Dijkstra
    6. Re:I have a lament too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting that Pro/Engineer was originally created for Unices, and the NT version is a latecomer... I believe there's an internal version that runs under Linux, as well.

    7. Re:I have a lament too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, an "internal version"? As in "one that nobody can get"? Like "one that won't be released because they know Linux users are dishonest thieves"? I see.

    8. Re:I have a lament too by RPoet · · Score: 1

      Hear, hear! And even more importantly, I'm worried about the amount of people willfully and thoughtlessly installing closed-source, unfree, proprietary graphic card drivers from nvidia or ATI. This represents a gradual shift towards closed infrastructural software in a system that's supposed to be built upon the principles of freedom and openness. These people show a complete lack of principles (freedom is nice, but I'll give it away gladly for shiny pebbles).

      And I, for one, will NOT welcome our new Unfree Overlords.

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
    9. Re:I have a lament too by Moschaef · · Score: 1

      Purity, integrity and your future... God... You're such a fucking weenie! They're playing a game not sending a donation to NAMBLA!

    10. Re:I have a lament too by MidnightBrewer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm a Mac user. Your point is?

      What does buying a game that runs on Windows have to do with sacraficing principles? It's a computer. "Not liking Microsoft" is not a significant principle in the grand scheme of things.

      --
      "Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
    11. Re:I have a lament too by slux · · Score: 1

      You've obviously not familiar with the Free Software Foundation's and the GNU project's philosophy if you need to ask that question. I recommend you read at least Why software should not have owners and more of the essays on the GNU/FSF website according to your interest.

    12. Re:I have a lament too by LurkerXXX · · Score: 2, Flamebait

      Some of us are familiar. We just think it's bullocks.

    13. Re:I have a lament too by Mikkeles · · Score: 1
      'Yes, even if you copied that windows CD and Gate$ gets no money from your HL2 experience. What you're doing is sending a message to game authors that it's OK to ignore Linux forever.'

      Since you've already copied Windows, there is nothing obviously different in copying HL2 and ensuring that Valve gets gets no money. :)

      'Tis probably better to send them a complaint, however.

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    14. Re:I have a lament too by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      It is unfortunate that you (and many others) will sacrifice your principles for a game.

      Whoever said that they were his principles?

      If MS does the job best, use MS. If Linux does the job best, use Linux.

      And you really expect someone using pirated windows to take a stand on "software principles?" Sheesh.

    15. Re:I have a lament too by ryanvm · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Yes, even if you copied that windows CD and Gate$ gets no money from your HL2 experience. What you're doing is sending a message to game authors that it's OK to ignore Linux forever.

      Solution: Copy the game too. ;)

    16. Re:I have a lament too by leifm · · Score: 1

      I think I'm replying to a troll, but what the hell...

      This is software we're talking about, nothing life or death! If you want to play HL2, boot into Windows and play it. There will be Linux native games when Linux has a critical mass of desktops, and a few geeks not buying a game isn't going to bring that critical mass any quicker.

      --

      "Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
    17. Re:I have a lament too by Torinaga-Sama · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I run 4 different OSes on 4 different computers.

      They are like shoes you see. Some are appropriate to stomp around in the dirt with. Some are better for formal situations, and some are jsut plain compfortable.

      Draw the analogy anyway you like, I own Quake 3 for Linux and I never ever did get it running to my satisfaction. The support for Linux Gaming just isn't there.Is that such a bad thing. Does Linux have to be all things to all people? It is wonderful and beautiful in it's niche but without a lot of work it is hopelessly outclassed in the gaming department.

      --
      (/local/home/curiosity)-#who -u|grep thecat|cut -c 44-49|xargs kill -9
    18. Re:I have a lament too by JaxGator75 · · Score: 1
      I hope you never eat at a restaurant that uses Windows, or shop at a store that licenses from MS, or travel through the air (airports use computers, too).

      Kinda like a vegetarian who wears leather...

      --
      Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
    19. Re:I have a lament too by 13Echo · · Score: 1

      Some of us are vegetarians for the health benefits. Some of us could care less about the animal rights stuff.

      Your analogy makes no sense.

    20. Re:I have a lament too by AugstWest · · Score: 1

      I realized that the only thing I was keeping Windows around for was Enemy Territory.

      Oh, look, ET for Linux. Whaddaya know?

      It's only outclassed b ecause games aren't ported to it. And games aren't ported to it because there's no money in doing so.

      Loki's gone, he was the last hope for Activision ports. I've been looking for other games to play in linux, and I'm finally playing SOF, but SOF2 wasn't ported because Loki went under and Activision decided that was it for linux.

    21. Re:I have a lament too by MidnightBrewer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a rhetorical question. That means you don't have to answer it. I think what the FSF believes is great, but it's only one philosophy, not the only one. It's easy to believe in something being free when it's intangible, like software. It doesn't address the issue of people making a living providing a service or product that other people want.

      Just because someone is charging you for a word processor that could theoretically be given away does not entitle you to a free word processor. In life, nobody is entitled to anything, period. People could theoretically build cars for free, but it doesn't happen. Just because it seems like a cheap investment doesn't mean that typing on a computer all day to make your living should be done for free.

      Slashdot wouldn't exist if there weren't programmers getting paid for what they're doing. They get paid when the company they work for makes money off of a product. That means somebody is selling something. Ideology is poor currency at the grocery store.

      --
      "Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
    22. Re:I have a lament too by xalres · · Score: 1

      This is the same thing Mac users have been saying since PC gaming became big. "If you buy a PC for gaming then you're telling the publishers that it's okay!"

      The real reason is probably more about numbers. They look at which platform is used by the majority of gamers. Just so happens it's the Windows PC. If you want to be a serious computer gamer, you have to bite the bullet and boot up Windoze. Of course, some people just need something to bitch about so they complain that game publishers don't support their platform. Be it Mac, Linux, BSD, etc.

      Imagine how much longer it would've taken Valve to write HL2 for Linux and every other open source OS. My god! It would be out about the same time as...Duke Nukem Forever!

      --
      If whales learn how to use weapons we're all screwed!
    23. Re:I have a lament too by Torinaga-Sama · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "And games aren't ported to it because there's no money in doing so."

      That is true, on top of the fact that it is a tremendous support nightmare. There about a hundred other things that can go wrong trying to get a game to work under linux than can go wrong under windows. Of all the things I have installed on either I would say the average success rate of putting a cd into my machine and installing something on Winodws is much higher than it is with Linux. With windows you don't need to worry about dependencies (except for maybe direct x which the game will install itself.

      There is something inherently wrong with having to work hard to play a game. I have no problem doing it to set up a server or write a script, but when it comes to games I just want to plug and play.

      It is not a bad thing, it makes Linux a more productive OS for me to operate under.

      --
      (/local/home/curiosity)-#who -u|grep thecat|cut -c 44-49|xargs kill -9
    24. Re:I have a lament too by delus10n0 · · Score: 0, Insightful

      I think you're forgetting the fact that it takes a bachelor's degree or greater to setup/compile the drivers for all of your hardware in loonix. And even that doesn't guarantee it'll work. And even if do get it to work, most of the time it's slower than the Windows version would be (Unreal Tournament 2003 is a great example of this.) Install Windows. Enjoy games. Use linux for workstations/servers.

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    25. Re:I have a lament too by jhylkema · · Score: 1

      Well, look at why we have to boot into Windows.

      I, for one, have never been able to get Wine or WineX to work for Calculator, much less HL2, even when using the "it's-supposed-to-work" settings. Also, when I've enabled DRI support for my Voodoo3 video card, it locks up my display when running a fscking screensaver.

      Not meant as a troll, but if the Linux community would come out with something that actually works, then we wouldn't have to boot into Windows to feed our game habits.

    26. Re:I have a lament too by tiger_66_y2k · · Score: 1

      Actually UT2003, NWN, Quake2, Quake3, and every game I've played in both Windows and Linux has run faster in Linux. Thats comparing framerates from Linux against the ones in Win98SE, Win2K, and WinXP. Also about half of the games I've ran in Wine and WineX run faster in Linux. I've even tested on about five different hardware configurations that yeilded the same results.
      Maybe you should just accept that you probably have things setup improperly and try asking for help rather than complaining about how "it doesn't work".

    27. Re:I have a lament too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are so damn right about that

    28. Re:I have a lament too by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      Or maybe I'll just install the game and not have to deal with compilers, compatability issues or drivers in order to play a game.

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    29. Re:I have a lament too by AugstWest · · Score: 1

      The native NWN client is great, even on hardware that couldn't run it in Windows.

      id games have never been an issue either. They all run flawlessly, I don't know what that guy is talking about. Then again, neither does he.

    30. Re:I have a lament too by butane_bob2003 · · Score: 1

      Thank you, I just realized I have been reading for an hour instead of writing code. Damn, the billable hours just slip away when your're reading /.

      --


      TallGreen CMS hosting
    31. Re:I have a lament too by Foolhardy · · Score: 1

      And mabye you don't have Windows configured properly, and that's why it's running slower.

    32. Re:I have a lament too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So how would game makers make money on games if they followed these principles? I don't think they'd make games out of the goodness of their hearts to give away for free. And most non-profit games either suck or don't even begin to approach the quality of some of today's blockbuster games.

      Not trying to troll, but I really am curious as to how this would work?

    33. Re:I have a lament too by riskyrik · · Score: 1

      I agree. Nowadays most people choose Windoze when it comes to gaming , because it is , at this moment , the better gaming environment. When enough people use Linux , support for gaming will increase automatically - so it's just a matter of being patient AND using Linux.

      --
      less is more
    34. Re:I have a lament too by binarybum · · Score: 1

      by cynical types do you mean rational people?

      c'mon, Linux isn't a religion, it's an alternative. being a good nerd is all about using the right tools for the right jobs. Sure I get frustrated with the postal service sometimes, and I do have alternatives, but sometimes it would just be assinine not to use the postal service.
      It's not as if m$ is doing something horrible liking killing babies, that warrants boycott style approaches. Do you use linux simply out of disdain for a corporation or because it's better at getting what you need done done?

      ps. the only message you'd be sending is more likely to be interpreted as "hey, people don't really like this kind of game, they're not buying it. let's turn HL3 into a golf simulator" If you want to send authors a message, try well, sending them a message! a letter stating why you think it would be worth their while to port to linux.

      --
      ôó
    35. Re:I have a lament too by !3ren · · Score: 1

      >It is unfortunate that you (and many others) will sacrifice your principles for a game.

      These guys would sacrifice their children to play this game.
      Be thankful there's no click through that makes you promise on your heart hope to die never to use an OS that makes Bill cry.

    36. Re:I have a lament too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's not a way of life, it's an OS. but it is a disappointment when companies don't support it.

    37. Re:I have a lament too by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      My parent post moderations:

      40% Insightful
      20% Flamebait
      20% Troll

      Whatever. Be bitter about me stating the truth.

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    38. Re:I have a lament too by slux · · Score: 1

      Richard Stallman sees this philosophy as a natural extension of the conventional western moral values. This makes the question of making a living off it completely irrelevant to him. (even if he does address that one too)

      Philosophical and ethical issues should not be mixed with practical issues because the philosophy and the ethically right thing to do always has to take precedence over the practical thing, no matter what the consequenses. It is only after the choice of what you think is right that you need to ask yourself how it will work.

      Your assumption seems to be that the only way anyone can make a living writing software is making "a product" out of it and you seem to think there's no way that product can be free at the same time, but in case you missed it, Red Hat, a company that has made a product out of free software and support services for that software just announced their best quarter so far.

      Providing support services is just one way of feeding those hungry free software programmers. Another possibility is that when company wants a piece of software, they hire some people to write it program. Or, you can sell the software with the hardware preinstalled.There's also the possibility of donations (Matthew Toseland has been developing freenet full-time, getting paid from donations and MandrakeClub has almost 20000 members supporting their distribution) - people can pay if they want to see the program develop. There are advertisements (which is Mandrake's latest experiment). And then there's community development (Debian) . Finally, to quote you: "In life nobody is entitled to anything, period." - So why exactly should someone be entitled to making a living off of programming? Stallman himself has said it - you've always have the option of doing something else.

      The issue of making a profit should not even come to consideration when deciding what is right, but there are many possible ways to make money off free software and I've probably missed a few.

    39. Re:I have a lament too by MidnightBrewer · · Score: 1
      Philosophical and ethical issues should not be mixed with practical issues because the philosophy and the ethically right thing to do always has to take precedence over the practical thing, no matter what the consequenses.


      In a Star Trek universe, yes. The vast majority of humanity, throughout history, has always bowed to practical concerns. Saying that practicality, morality, and ethics should not be mixed is a bit of a contradiction: philosphy springs out of the human reaction to the practicalities of existence. The former would not exist without the latter.

      Your assumption seems to be that the only way anyone can make a living writing software is making "a product" out of it and you seem to think there's no way that product can be free at the same time, but in case you missed it, Red Hat, a company that has made a product out of free software and support services for that software just announced their best quarter so far.


      So a company of programmers has announced that sales of their product, i.e. support, has turned a profit? Good for them! So the company does not exist on goodwill and happy thoughts, but has instead found a clever way to capitalize on the free labor of others.
      --
      "Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
  2. Not sure I can sympathize by Robotech_Master · · Score: 3, Funny

    Given that I'm stuck on an old overclocked Celeron 300A/450 mHZ which has difficulty running even Half-Life one at full speed, I have a hard time feeling sorry for this fellow.

    --
    Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
    1. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by Cowclops · · Score: 1

      Geez. I could play HL fine on my PII 400 with a Voodoo3. A celeron 300a at 450mhz would only be better, unless you didn't have any sort of 3d acceleration or something...

    2. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by Robotech_Master · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, all right, I was exaggerating slightly (I probably just need to reinstall Windows is likely what the trouble is) but the truth is, I'm feeling kind of bitter about having been waiting for Half-Life II all this time (I even wrote a chapter of Half-Life fanfic for crying out loud) and I don't know when I'm ever going to get to play it. Sigh.

      --
      Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
    3. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by cancrman · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Can't really sympathize with you. You can get a 2.2ghz Dell (evil yes. No, I don't care) sans monitor for ~$600. Including the Windows license that is apparently needed to play HL2. Financing it would prolly cost $20/month.

      Stop bitching and buy a new box. Or buy new internals and use your old case. Or buy an old Athlon 1.XGHZ for $300 on eBay. Or wait 6 months until it comes out on the consoles and spend $150 on one of those.

      No to flame, but shut up.

      --
      The sole purpose of the Internet is to get porn and bomb making plans into the hands of children.
    4. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by 56ksucks · · Score: 1, Informative
      check this out, you can get an nForce motherboard for like $60 and a 1.3ghz duron for like $30, or you can splurge and get an Athlon for $50. For $150 - $200 (cause you have to buy some DDR too) you can run almost any game you want. For the ones that won't run on the build in GeForce2 chip, there's an AGP slot.

      ------

      --

      ---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"

    5. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a lot of money there. I mean, I but a Dell P4 2.4GHz with a 15" LCD for less than $600 a year ago.

    6. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And why is Dell evil, you commie cocksucker? Because they're successful?

    7. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by Setsuna · · Score: 5, Funny

      Since you are running at 450 millihertz (mHz) I can understand your problems... Probably you should try overclocking to, say, 450 megahertz (MHz)

    8. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by godders · · Score: 1

      No, because they sell shitty hardware that breaks regularly. So if you actually need to get some work done with any degree of reliability you have to take one of their ludicrously expensive on-site warranties.

    9. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is why you should go out and buy a gaming console, you peon. Consoles were designed for gaming, computers were not. Why you idiots love to bash the Windows platform, yet are the first to come crying when your computer hardware (upon which Windows is sitting) isn't up to snuff, is beyond me.

    10. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Huh, I played half-life 1 on a P1 233 with software rendering, no hw 3d support at all.

      Worked great.

      Got a bit dodgy with some of the later mods (the mad rotating boat trip in Heart of Evil :-)), but now I've got a hugely poweful PIII 700Mhz all is ok again.

      (cue 3 Yorkshiremen sketch. By the way, I was born in Dewsbury :)).

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    11. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aww, godders poured cocoa on his keyboard and blamed Dell. How sad!

    12. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm looking at a Dell Optiplex thats currently in peices after its (non standard) power supply went south and took the hard drive with it. It took Dell a week to get us a replacement drive & power supply. What a load of shit.

    13. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by aflat362 · · Score: 1
      Why is dell evil? - I shall feed you Troll for the off chance that someone might actually read my post.

      They have a huge personal computer market share. Almost everyone I know that is planning on buying a new computer professes that they are going to replace their Gateway / Compaq / HP with a Dell.

      Almost everyone I know that has in fact purchased a computer in the last year - its been a dell. My company purchases Dell for every one of its new workstations. I'm in a training class for a different company right now (on lunch break) and I'm typing this on a Dell.

      Dell computers use non standard parts. If you want to buy a new case for your PC innards - Good Luck! in fact if you want to do just about anything to modify or replace the components you're probably going to be S.O.L.

      Just try and buy a Dell computer running anything but Windows - let me know how that goes.

      And . . . worst of all, that Steven guy sucked and the Interns suck even more.

      --

      Conserve Oil, Recycle, Boycott Walmart

    14. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by iantri · · Score: 1

      I'm afraid your post is a little inaccurate. Valve did a GREAT job with Half-Life and so it is playable on my P166 with NO hardware accelleration. I can get 15-20fps at 320x240 on it.

    15. Re:Not sure I can sympathize by jjhlk · · Score: 1

      I played originally on my P2-MMX 200mhz machine, with a voodoo2. It ran fine then. Of course, if I were to go play on it now I'd notice the bad framerate, but if I had never used a faster computer since I'd still be playing happily on it.

  3. MS does good by KrackHouse · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I hate to say it but sometimes MS is just better. DX is better than OGL, discuss amongst yourselves.

    --
    What if Digg added local news and a Slashdot inspired comment karma system? ---
    http://houndwire.com
    1. Re:MS does good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wow! That's a neat trick! Here, let me try it:

      OpenGL is better than DirectX. Discuss amongst yourselves.

      Wow, that worked really well!

    2. Re:MS does good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      no no no, you phrased that wrong, the proper way is: I know I'm going to get modded down for this, but DX is better than OGL.

    3. Re:MS does good by thryllkill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know much from a game coder angle, but my position in recent years has been that Linux is a OS for getting work done, and Windows is an excellent platform for games. With Microsoft in the console market with the X-Box, maybe they are preparing themselves to be a game company when Linux takes over the desktop market (if it does). Another piece of support for microsoft and gaming is this: the last few nights I've been playing Asheron's Call 2, and I gotta say it pwns everquest as far as getting a new player started and interested.

      --

      Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.

    4. Re:MS does good by rblancarte · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, I don't know if I totally agree. But I will say this - if you want to play games, use Windows. I mean, we are not talking rocket science here, while Linux is a great OS for things like development, etc, it just isn't the system of choice for gaming. Honestly, how many games are really out there, especially compared w/ the number of games in the Windows market?

      Then again, this article does talk about the state of Linux gaming. Which is slim right now. But then again, look at the user base.

      It is a tough argument to make. On one hand you have the masses that will buy your games no problem. On the other hand you have this small, but VERY thankful group who will not forget the fact that you put out a game for them (or that you didn't).

      But I still have to go back to the fact that if you really really want to play latest games, have a Windows partition so that you can boot to just for that. Compatibility will never be an issue.

      RonB

      --
      It is human nature to take shortcuts in thinking.
    5. Re:MS does good by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know why this was modded as flamebait. But the dirty truth is this. DX is the best API to program a game for. Open GL may provide an edge in graphics, but that's all. When coding in DirectX, you get more then graphic support such as audio, and joysticks. But that all said, you will have a few games that run on multipul platforms such as Quake3, Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo2 to name a few.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    6. Re:MS does good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I wasn't aware any of Blizzard's games were linux native (not including Wine, of course).

      As for your other statements, I respect your opinion, and disagree with your flamebait modding, but please provide evidence that DX is better than OGL. I have heard that the latest incarnation of OGL is just as good, if not better than DX 9, and I am wondering if anyone could explain what is the main quality differences between the 2.

    7. Re:MS does good by Spl0it · · Score: 1
      thryllkill (52874)
      but my position in recent years has been that Linux is a OS for getting work done, and Windows is an excellent platform for games.
      You've got to be joking... run any game in Windows (that can be run in linux)..and you'll notice that not only will the game get higher FPS but games seem to run smoother.

      My brother had WinXP and Debian running on his Desktop PC...he got 33FPS on Average more in Linux playing Half-Life (Couter-Strike). -Spl0it
      --

      No, this is
    8. Re:MS does good by thryllkill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Prolly true, but then try playing Half-Life2 in Linux. How much better are your frame rates now? Until Linux has enough games to compete with MS, Windows will be a better platform for games regardless of Linux's technological supiriority. Even though the X-Box has better graphics, most people will say that the PS2 is better. Why? Because it has more games that is why.

      --

      Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.

    9. Re:MS does good by Second+Vampyre · · Score: 1, Informative

      He said, multiple platforms - not runs on Linux.
      Think mac.

    10. Re:MS does good by Spl0it · · Score: 1

      Sure Windows has more 'games'... but if you take the top 10 games in the last say 5-7years.. Q2,Q3, Tribes, Q1?, Unreal, U2k3, Half-Life, etc..
      I'm guessing what... all of those run under Linux? if not most.. I dunno about you but I don't consider the other games very 'important'...

      but maybe thats because I like to compete! www.wearegamers.com/smackdown
      -Spl0it

      --

      No, this is
    11. Re:MS does good by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      OpenGL 1.4, the new spec that's not completely out yet is close to somewhere between DX7 and DX8. DX9 is out right now, and has a few advantages over DX8. OpenGL 2.0 is very close to matching DX9 part for part in graphics. It's nowhere near out and DX10 is surely on the way.

      So for now OpenGL is playing catch up. If they manage to speed up their approval process, they might get back to where they were a few years ago, but they have to really work on it.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    12. Re:MS does good by Fallout2man · · Score: 1

      The issue isn't really even that DirectX is good or not at this point so much, it's that the entire game engine has been written using it and only it. The original half-life could be ported since it had an OpenGL renderer. However the entire half-life 2 engine would more then likely have to be re-written to work on Linux. It can work on the Xbox since it uses a slightly modified DirectX version.

      For those commenting about the SDL, I don't remember exactly but isn't it software only? I'm currently unaware of any unified hardware library that'd work on all distros of linux.

      As well there's the fact that really the only competition for DirectX is OpenGL and they need to hurry their asses up with the 2.0 specification if they expect to be around much longer and considered seriously by most gamers.

      So half-life 2 was not ported more then likely because it was written with a windows only hardware based API, why? because it was the best possible way at the time to write software that would have the primary purpose of running on windows, which is the operating system over 90% of people use. Microsoft offered a nice and tidy solution.

      If Valve were as crazy as the folks at iD, then maybe they'd have thrown together ten different APIs haphazardly and used OpenGL's vendor specific extensions to make HL2, but it would've taken much longer, and while it could then be ported to other OSes, it's questionable that it would have looked as good. The game will probably never be ported by valve themself, because it would require almost an entire game re-write and definitely a new renderer from scratch at the least, new shaders, etc.

      That's not to say it couldn't be done, but quite honestly, from a standpoint of any sane businessman, why would you do that to appease a small portion of the 4 or 5% of people that use Linux as a desktop OS? Carmack, he's crazy, he doesn't even understand the necessity of a use key in an FPS.

    13. Re:MS does good by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1

      regardless of Linux's technological supiriority

      What "technological supiriority?" Seriously, I'm curoius what you meant.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    14. Re:MS does good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      OpenGL 1.4 is already released. OpenGL 1.5 and 2.0 are the ones that are being discussed by the ARB still. Most of the features for OpenGL 1.5 are already usable as extensions, they're just not required to be supported by the vendors to be OpenGL 1.4 compatible (obviously).

      Even OpenGL 2.0 is just a lot of OpenGL 1.x features standardized and cleaned up a bit in a couple cases (although deprecated interfaces will remain for backwards compatibility for a while).

    15. Re:MS does good by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 0

      I use Windows for gaming... it only makes sense at the moment. If Linux were going to compete with that, it can't do a Microsoft and continually steal/port games/ideas from other platforms. It will have to innovate.... and when a group of coders release a wicked game on Linux that isn't anywhere else, THEN maybe people will start taking notice. So far, Linux has only really innovated the server rooms of the world.... Also... I have an ATI Radeon 9700 All in wonder, and Red Hat 9.... and there's no driver for it that runs on the latest version of X. So no tux-racer for me until something gets done about it. Quite frankly, the situation sucks...

      --
      READY.
      PRINT ""+-0
    16. Re:MS does good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      OMG, not another one who doesn't know anything about game programming.

      OpenGL 1.4 has been out for a while, and all the major graphics companies have released OpenGL 1.4 libraries.

      You don't compare OpenGL with DirectX. You compare it to D3D intermediate mode (D3D IM). I will just call it D3D from now on.

      While core OpenGL is behind D3D 9, OpenGL 1.4 with ARB, EXT and vender specific extensions is actually ahead of D3D 9. And nobody, who is a serious game programmer, uses only the core.

      OpenGL 1.5 is the next up, and will feature optional support for a standard vertex and pixel shader programs, i.e it will make all the vender specific extensions concerning vertex/pixel shader into ARB extensions.

      OpenGL 2.0 will only make those foremention extensions mandatory. That is, they will be a part of the core.

      Microsoft has publically annouced that they will not develop another version of DX for a couple of years (They said that around the release of DX 9). That's perfectly understandable, since there isn't really anything major to add, for the moment...

      So in conlusion. OpenGL never has, and never will, play catch up to D3D. In fact, they are always ahead of D3D, due to the extension mechanism. And no, coding for extensions is not hard. It's in fact very simple.

      And let's conveniently forget that D3D can't do everything that OpenGL can. DX simply isn't a useable workstation 3D API. There's a reason all 3D workstation applications use OpenGL...

      Please, in the future, don't talk about stuff you don't know anything about. It just makes you look stupid...

    17. Re:MS does good by sakarada · · Score: 2

      Yes, this is true. I think if you already have windows on the machine then there shoudl be no real problem booting it to play a game. I agree however that it would be nice if developers did support linux users, especially if they are running their server. However perhaps some developers, like me, are still little reluctant to release commercial applictions on linux. (However i am happy to help contribute to open source in my spare time). The reason for example is peopel like the free software foundation. What if i should accidently compile a library realased under GPL into my programme. Then legally they have breached the GPL by not relaeasing the full source code. Now i know that most of the libraries are realeased under the Lesser GPL, but considering the FSF demands that they hold the copyright to this software they are entitiled to change this at any moment, for future releases. While perhaps this may not be a real problem, it is the towards commercial software of people like this that piss me off.

    18. Re:MS does good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As usual, this dickhead is wrong about everything concerning DX and OpenGL.

    19. Re:MS does good by Fallout2man · · Score: 1

      Oh, and if I'm so wrong then why have you not pointed out one specific thing? If I'm so wrong why are you posting anonymously and only uttering a short sentence to mock me? Come up with some real points before you open your mouth, I wasn't being hostile and there's no reason you should respond in such a way, unless you feel like calling people names makes you a bigger person.

    20. Re:MS does good by theefer · · Score: 1, Interesting

      while Linux is a great OS for things like development, etc, it just isn't the system of choice for gaming.


      It is.
      Or rather, it can be. Quake 3 run faster on my GNU/Linux partition than on windows, etc. It is efficient. Companies just refuse to take the risk to embrace this market (except ID and some other, more power to 'em !).

      The question is not whether GNU/Linux could be an OS for gamers. It could indeed. Yes, gamers would be a little lost, not having to install new drivers for the graphical device twice a day. But if there were a real game market, the manufacturer might spend more time on up to date drivers for our OS. (to have more game we need the drivers -- chicken-egg problem -- blah blah -- YES. Still, you won't succeed unless you try. This is the very essence of GNU/Linux).

      The question could be, should we make it a gaming platform. Why not, I think the power of this OS lies in its versatility. We do not lack gamers IMHO : most of the current userbase is more or less hard-core geeks. Many of them prefer to code (and many w$ users prefer to work or word or ..), but there are still many gamers among them, I'm sure of that.

      So, will GNU/Linux become a (The?) gaming platform, I don't know. With Doom 3 and Deus Ex 2, we'll still have 2 out of the three big FPS's to come, which is not that bad. Who knows if the other developpers will follow the example ? The answer is quite simple : buy the game and play under GNU/Linux (sorry RMS :( ), so that they know we exist and are ready to pay.
      --
      theefer
    21. Re:MS does good by korielgraculus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Of all time:

      "The Sims" for PC: ~10 Million Units
      "Half-Life" for PC: ~8 Million Units
      "Myst" for PC: ~7 Million Units

      Or for 2002:

      1) The Sims: Vacation
      2) The Sims Unleashed
      3) Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos
      4) Medal of Honor: Allied Assault
      5) The Sims
      6) The Sims: Hot Date
      7) The Sims Deluxe
      8) Zoo Tycoon
      9) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
      10) Roller Coaster Tycoon 2

      Not many of these appear to be playable under Linux by default, I'm not sure how many would be playable using WINE or WINEX though.

    22. Re:MS does good by Temporal · · Score: 1

      What does video have to do with sound? The video API and the sound API do not need to interact in any way whatsoever, so there is no reason why you can't use DirectSound and OpenGL at the same time. Or, better yet, use OpenGL and OpenAL. UT2k3 uses OpenAL for audio, ya know. And input? Why would you even want to use the abomination that is DirectInput? Did you know that DirectInput intentionally ignores the user's keyboard layout? Most DirectInput games simply assume that you are using a qwerty keyboard, which screws over people like me (I use Dvorak). Did you know that DirectInput isn't actually any faster than GDI input? Well, maybe it is slightly, but if so it's certainly not noticeable to the user. In a few obscure situations, DirectInput can be marginally useful, but in general it's just a waste of time (ever notice how UT had an "enable DirectInput" option which was off by defult?).

      I'm lead programmer for a little gaming company you probably haven't heard of (yet). We're creating a 3D game using OpenGL for video, OpenAL for sound, and the window manager for input. Works great. Although development is taking place on Windows, we plan to port to OSX, FreeBSD, and Linux, as each port will probably take only a day or two to complete. Hell, porting to Linux will probably be no more than a recompile once we have it running on FreeBSD.

    23. Re:MS does good by minus9 · · Score: 1

      Look again. ATI Radeon drivers XFree86 4.3

      Works fine with my Radeon 9700

    24. Re:MS does good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut your goddamn mouth, fag.

    25. Re:MS does good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it just isn't the system of choice for gaming

      Not sure about that. Linux is amazingly stable. Regarding gaming, my habit is to play a little q3, then leave the game open while doing some other stuff (on different workspaces btw) like browsing, irc, editing, watching tv, compiling, then sometime return to the game etc. I suspect you can't do that with Windows without running itno stability or performance problems.

    26. Re:MS does good by cehbab · · Score: 1

      Thankfully we have ID, and they have some clues about making games work everywhere for everyone, and are willing to allow ports to as many architectures and platforms as is possible. Some companies realize thats its not simply all about the money, especially when they have enough..

    27. Re:MS does good by slux · · Score: 1

      GNU/Linux is my preferred operating system. If I want to play games, they will have to be for this operating system. If I just use Windows for games I will keep using it forever because there will never be any Linux games if there is no demand for them. I won't boot my system just to play a little game either. That way I'd just end up using Windows all the time because it'd be more convenient for me to just launch the game instead of waiting forever for a boot, then launching it and afterwards booting back to Linux.

      I don't want to pay for something I don't really want to use and I don't want to unnecessarily waste my hard drive space. There may be somewhat less choice for a pure Linux gamer but no-one really needs every possible game on the market and the selection for GNU/Linux is enough for most of us unless you *really* need to get all the latest games scoring over 90% in the latest PC Gamer.

      If no-one's willing to make a sacrifice of a few cool games, there will never be a significant market for Linux games. It's the classic problem, the first adopters need to accept some inconveniences but it will never go big no-one wants to.

    28. Re:MS does good by EpsCylonB · · Score: 1

      The question is not whether GNU/Linux could be an OS for gamers. It could indeed. Yes, gamers would be a little lost, not having to install new drivers for the graphical device twice a day. But if there were a real game market, the manufacturer might spend more time on up to date drivers for our OS. (to have more game we need the drivers -- chicken-egg problem -- blah blah -- YES. Still, you won't succeed unless you try. This is the very essence of GNU/Linux).

      I have seen a couple of suggestions on this thread that maybe a modified Knoppix like live cd could turn a pc into a instant linux based games console. I have to say this sounds like a great idea but for it to work you really need decent linux drivers for both nvidia and ATI to availiable on the game cd. So a linux release would be delayed until the drivers become availiable.

      I guess the next biggest problem would be HDD access. Would it be possible for a live cd distro to examine an ntfs partiotion and make use of any free space without harming the performance or the integrity of the data ?.

    29. Re:MS does good by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1

      You meant to say "Linux." "GNU/Linux" is ridiculous. I could easily strip out all GNU apps on my Linux system and still be running Linux as my operating system. You know, the system operating my computer and controlling my devices?

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    30. Re:MS does good by thryllkill · · Score: 1

      Just because a game is popular does not mean it is good. Tomb Raider is a prime example of boring repetative annoying game play, and yet for years it dominated game culture.

      --

      Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.

    31. Re:MS does good by Spl0it · · Score: 1

      http://www.theclq.com/ hmm I was going to point to that to show the usage of games... Sales cannot be used for stats as millions of copies are pirated every year...

      My basic point is that the games that are 'Action' games, overwhelm other games with usage statistics. Almost all Action games are available in a Linux port.. you do however show that there isn't much for 'kids' games on Linux (The Sims *). But realistically how many 'kids' use Linux?

      -Spl0it

      --

      No, this is
    32. Re:MS does good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Transgaming ported the sims to linux, war3 was made playable under wine by transgaming. Icculus made a native medal of honor: allied assault port. Half-life also runs under wine. This means linux is missing myst, harry potter, and zoo/rollercoaster tycoon.

    33. Re:MS does good by StarTux · · Score: 1

      "Well, I don't know if I totally agree. But I will say this - if you want to play games, use Windows. I mean, we are not talking rocket science here, while Linux is a great OS for things like development, etc, it just isn't the system of choice for gaming. Honestly, how many games are really out there, especially compared w/ the number of games in the Windows market?"

      How many decent games? Enough for me, although I miss combat flight sims. But is it worth having a partition to boot to Windows? Have yo ever done so? Its a major PITA. So there you are working on stuff on Linux with their apps, suddenly you have a little time to play something, and with dual boot you have to save work, shut down and reboot and then wait for Windows to load. Of course, once you're finally in Windows you then have to reboot back to Linux because you have just missed your play time window.

      "But I still have to go back to the fact that if you really really want to play latest games, have a Windows partition so that you can boot to just for that. Compatibility will never be an issue."

      Compatibilty may not be an issue, but its a major PITA. After awhile you'd tire of it.

      Best thing, write letters. No-one knows the exact Linux market size as you're dealing with quite a few ways with which to get Linux installed, so yes its certainly small, but how small/large is it? And is it growing?

      Whether or not the game should be ported not only depends on the size of the market, but also how it is coded, and in gaming the code tends not to be well coded due to market factors :).

      Few people seem to have mentioned Winelib as an option...

    34. Re:MS does good by Foolhardy · · Score: 1

      It sounds like your brother doesn't have Windows configured properly... is he using some obscure drivers, or have 20 gator-look-alike apps loaded? Are the video settings EXACTLY the same (aa, res, depth, af)?

    35. Re:MS does good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Or rather, it can be. Quake 3 run faster on my GNU/Linux partition than on windows, etc.
      etc? what else was it running on? Is that some kind of blanket statement that states: Linux can run it better than ANYTHING. EVER.
    36. Re:MS does good by Foolhardy · · Score: 1
      Did you know that DirectInput isn't actually any faster than GDI input?
      GDI stands for Graphical Device Interface. GDI has nothing to do with the mouse or keyboard. There are the mouse and keyboard drivers, any filters, the window station, and the user32 messaging from the win32 subsystem.
    37. Re:MS does good by Spl0it · · Score: 1

      Yes they settings where the same (SAME Config) aswell as res and refresh rates!

      Why don't you try it, run Quake3 for example and benchmark the FPS in windows then linux..you can see the difference...

      Kind of offtopic but I was able to host 4+ q3 servers at lan on my 750 athlon(which is debian) and I was only able to host 2 without lag on my winblows box (XP 1800+)

      -Spl0it

      --

      No, this is
    38. Re:MS does good by Temporal · · Score: 1

      ::rolls eyes:: You know what I mean.

    39. Re:MS does good by bigman2003 · · Score: 1

      Well that seems impressive, hosting all of those games.

      Then I read your sig.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    40. Re:MS does good by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      GameCube is better still, but not even for the number of games, but because GameCube developers value quality over quantity.

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    41. Re:MS does good by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      The idea of extensions alone puts OpenGL behind the game as far as graphics programming goes. Direct3D has a standardized interface for all that OpenGL requires as extensions.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    42. Re:MS does good by Spl0it · · Score: 1

      Guess its time to update that! expect one tommorow!

      I got Cable 2years ago...but for 7years I was gaming on a 56k.. and the lan was 300+ ppl lan on a 100mbit network :o

      -Spl0it

      --

      No, this is
    43. Re:MS does good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That's incorrect. I see that you didn't take my advice...

      OpenGL supports functions that are not in 3D3 yet. This is possible soley due to the extension mechanism.

      Remember DX 8.0 and DX 8.1? An entire new DX version just to optimze for ATI cards. Standard interface my ass.

      Just take the eascent development. DX 9.0 (via it's HLSL) is optimized for the ATI shaders (lots of registers, 1:1 tradeoff for instructions and MT, etc.). Wonder if we'll see a DX 9.1 for Nvidia cards...

      Once again, the OpenGL extension mechanism is what actually puts OpenGL ahead of 3D3 and it's what will ensure that it will always stay ahead. It ensured maximum performance for the cards, by catering to their hardware implementation. Every graphis programmer worth a damn knows this. And the good thing is, eventually, everything will be included into the standard, but will be available today (shader programs were available in OpenGL 6 months before DX 8 was released.).

    44. Re:MS does good by jjhlk · · Score: 1

      But was everything being rendered?

    45. Re:MS does good by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      The reason HLSL was ATI favorable is because NVidia did not impliment their shaders in the same manner as suggested by ATI when talking to MS about HLSL. Having been updated, HLSL is much better in this area now. You say that it ensures maximum performance for each card, but that means that one must optimize their game for each card. Which is not going to happen. Game makers will choose one card and work on that.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    46. Re:MS does good by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      Yes, and I'm sure everyone out there has updated their video drivers so that they have OGL support. Think abou this, most games that use DirectX ship with it. How many ship with drivers for OpenGL?

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
  4. why not support the companies that support us? by consumer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just played a good game of Unreal Tournament 2003 on my Linux box. It plays great, the installer came on the CD, and all updates have been available for Linux. If Valve doesn't care about you, spend your money somewhere else.

    1. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by saden1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You won't have this luxury come next release! Microsoft has Epic in its pockets.

      Money talks, bullshit walks. With Microsoft you get both.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    2. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not about supporting. It's about fucking playing Half Life 2! Yeah!

    3. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by rblancarte · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This does raise a good point. I pointed this out later, but the Linux community is VERY VERY happy to support those who take time for them. Your right about what you say "you make a game for us, we won't forget." Then again, it is not like Valve doesn't care about this segment of the market, it is a case where they have only so much time and they are doing what they can to get what they can out there.
      Who knows, maybe we will see a native Linux version, but you can't hold your breath for it.

      --
      It is human nature to take shortcuts in thinking.
    4. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by sn0wman3030 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree whole-heartedly. This is 2003, and the biggest game of the year locks you down to a propriotary platform. This is an inexcusable insult on Valve's behalf.

      ID and Activition are both releasing competitors to Half-Life 2 (Doom 3 and Unreal Tournament 2004) that will run on linux, and I would strongly recomend either of them over HL2 soley based on principal. If you just buy the damn game like they want you to, and never demand alternative OS support, they're never going to care.

      It's too bad, really, because hl2 looks like a spectacular game.

      --
      Life is offtopic.
    5. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by nacturation · · Score: 2, Funny

      Money talks, bullshit walks. With Microsoft you get both.

      So that would be... expensive talking bullshit?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    6. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by sniser2 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I take it you have no fucking clue what kind of revelation and gamers dreams coming true HL2 represents.. I mean the physics.

      The only way around halflife2 is another game using the havoc 2 engine.

      Valve doesn't care about you? Think of it as a *really* hot chick wanting you to be something you're not. Usually you'd say screw that (no pun intended), but if the hotness is too big you'll end up in that janitors uniform going "quack, quack!".

      It might be worth the humiliation.

    7. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Time+Doctor · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to beyondunreal.com, 2004 will have a Linux Client.

      --
      Check out ioquake3.org for a great, free, First-Person Shooter engine!
    8. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Exiler · · Score: 1

      Limted time? Half-life has been out for what, a kabillijan years?

      Not that I think it's worth playing anyway...

      --
      Banaaaana!
    9. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Second+Vampyre · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yes, religion.

    10. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad Doom III and UT2004 will almost certainly be shit.

    11. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Paul+d'Aoust · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      what?

      --
      Standing at the very edge of my imagination, I peered into the inky void and realised -- I couldn't think up a new sig.
    12. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Will it have gameplay that is fun, too? That'd be great!

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    13. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by sql*kitten · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is an inexcusable insult on Valve's behalf.

      Oh, how short the geek memory. Remember Loki? A company that tried to bring mainstream games to the Linux platform?

      The problem is, while geeks talk the talk, they don't walk the walk with their wallets. There simply isn't a market for games on Linux. A few people might buy a Linux copy, sure, but the majority will buy the Windows version when it's released, then demand the Linux version for free when it's finished porting.

      Games companies are in business to make money. They're not charities, and even if they were, even charities need money to operate. Valve is simply making what it believes to be the best decision based on its reading of the market.

    14. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 1

      I hope ID releases the Doom3 demo on linux and MacOS-X first like they did with Quake3. That would be a real boost to the linux guys (both of us) in our local gaming group.

      It's almost impossible to get people to install linux when they could be playing BF1942 or C&C:Generals instead. I can only imagine the work we would have to put in the weekend that the Doom3 demo for Linux only comes out. Maybe some of these wankers will ask us to help them set up RedHat then.

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
    15. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Sevn · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Lets see,

      I paid 50 bucks for my tin box edition Linux quake3 and installed it on FreeBSD. I paid 40 bucks for my Linux version of RTCW. I paid 50 bucks for UT2003 and it installed on Linux. I paid like 20 for UT because I came it late. So like, you really don't know what the fuck you are talking about. :) THANK YOU FOR PLAYING!

      --
      For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    16. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Sevn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Too bad Steam is already proving to be DRMified shit. I don't have very high hopes for HL2 anymore. I'm sick of Gabe Newell whining about why he can't get his shitty code to work with nvidia cards when everybody else doesn't seem to have any problems. On the other hand, ID has always done right by me. They kinda invented the whole Genre and their games ALWAYS blow everyone away. So I'm pretty sure Doom3 and Quake4 will rock intently. I hope UT2004 is at least as fun with instagib as UT2003 is. It's not a terribly great game.

      --
      For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    17. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      What you like, fail to note is that there were like about 100 of you, in total like, that bought anything for Linux. The rest just said "RTCW wants to be free!" like, and pirated a windows copy.

      So you talk like, like a retarded valley girl or something. THANK YOU FOR LIKE, SHARING YOUR DELUSION!

    18. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > the Linux community is VERY VERY happy to support those who take time for them

      Really? Because the reputaiton of the "Linux Community" is that they want everything for "Free" and don't like paying for anything.

    19. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1

      Look, the founders of Valve are former Microsoft coders. They're comfortable with Windows. The "Linux gaming market" is much, much too small to warrant all the extra effort in porting to it when they could be concentrating on this highly-anticipated sequel they have in development. I hate when people refuse to see the other perspective because they're too busy trying to be idealistic for a minority community.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    20. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Loki made heaps of money, loved all that VERY VERY happy community support eh! Oh...

      "you make a game for us, we won't forget."

      But you did, just now, didn't you!

    21. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wankers? Err no, that would be the pimply lardpiles playing with their toy operating system while everyone else is playing a game.

    22. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by thogard · · Score: 1

      If id's games always blow you away, your not pulling the trigger soon enough.

    23. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know why this bothers me so much, but it does. And I'm probably the 5 millionth slashdotter to mention it, but...

      ID = I.D. = identification = not the game company

      id = the game company, as in id, ego, super ego.

    24. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good for you snowman! You boycott those wicked fellows! It seems obvious all they care about is money, not satisfying your whims as they should. The only thing is, you might have to email and tell them that you're boycotting. Cause otherwise they might not notice.

    25. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by supun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >idealistic for a minority community.

      But that is how a minority becomes a majority. If no one takes a stand, then the issue will not be visible to others.

      If we followed your mindset, we'd still think the world was flat.

      --
      :w!
    26. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're going to get pedantic about it, I believe they capitalize it iD. How's that, smarty pants?

    27. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Taurim · · Score: 0

      I own 5 Loki Games, that's more original games than the vast majority of Windows users !

      The problem with Loki was not the sales but the poor management.

    28. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Lies, lies, lies. Loki never sold more than 5000 of ANY Linux title - obviously way too few to make any money. If it wasn't for the dotcom linux hysteria of the times they would never have even been a company.

    29. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by SiggyRadiation · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Would you pay the additional R&D costs associated with game-development on two platforms?

      I mean, there would be 3 parts in the costs:
      1. General development of the Game
      2. Implementation for windows
      3. Implementation for Linux

      Now costs for #1 would be devided over all sales.
      Costs for #2 would be devided over all sales for Windows.
      Costs for #3 would be devided over all sales for Linux (being... whell... a few thousand?)

      A realistic price for the game on windows would be 50 or 60 euro's (forgive me, I am in euroland). A realistic price for linux would be 250 - 350 euro's.

      Now, it's very nice of those folks at ID et al that are pretty much helping out Linux-users by taking Linux R&D costs and include them in the windows-variant. But would you, Linux ubergeek, *want* those darn windowsusers to pay for your product?

      Dumb question. I know.
      SiggyRadiation.

      --
      This unique sig is intended to make this user more recognisable.
    30. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not just being comfortable with windows. Microsoft caters to game developers exact needs with DirectX making it so simple to create excellent games with pre defined code that has also made its way to hardware now. Linux has no such thing.

    31. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Really? Because the reputaiton of the "Linux Community" is that they want everything for "Free" and don't like paying for anything.

      Unfortunately, until Linux users spend more money and more people move to Linux, the perception won't differ much. It's hard to make money on Linux, sorry. Going somewhere else is going to get you nothing in the long run, as any little incentive there is now for the company will evaporate. Move on and you may have one less choice in the future. I for one respect Valve's commitment to provide a Linux-based server module (with source, IIRC!). If the demand is there for a client port, they will do it, but probably not before.

    32. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Ringlord · · Score: 1

      I bought Neverwinter Nights from Bioware because of the Linux client. Great game!

      I don't play that many games anymore, so now I am only interested in buying those that I can play on my OS of choice - Linux.

    33. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Restil · · Score: 5, Informative

      While we're talking about short memories, don't forget that Loki failed not because they had no market, but because they were poorly managed. They were one of many holdouts to the dotcom era who's only ambition, only hope, was not to bring the love of gaming to linux, but to IPO and cash out. It's sad too, seeing how many of the employees of this company that was doomed to fail, stuck it out regardless, and at the end, went months without getting paid, and in some case even spending their own cash to keep the company alive, and in the end, they get screwed by the owner.

      Had the company been managed properly, they'd still be around today, and going strong. Linux would have a much stronger influence on game companies pondering to make a linux port, and if they were successful, there would be other serious competitors. Alas, the chance was lost, only because people at the top had the wrong vision.

      At least we got SDL out of it.

      -Restil

      --
      Play with my webcams and lights here
    34. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Associate · · Score: 1

      Amazing as it may sound, setting up RedHat isn't that hard for even the beginner. What is hard is what comes after it's installed. This of course leads to the Linux/Desktop issue which I'd rather avoid, but is at the root, no pun intended, of the problem. The last thing many gamers would like to do when they get that brand spanking new game is configure, compile or tweak anything not related to the game. They want drop the disk in, click INSTALL and play.
      Again, please do not use this post as a point to start the Linux on the desktop debate. That is all.

      --
      Someone hates these cans.
    35. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Trejkaz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Complaining about porting time is just another way to make the world think it's not their fault for not using a portable programming model in the first place.

      Can anyone say, SDL? Because Valve can't even seem to spell it.

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    36. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Natalie's+Hot+Grits · · Score: 2, Flamebait

      The problem is, while geeks talk the talk, they don't walk the walk with their wallets.

      no... the problem is that Loki got fucked by nVidia's and ATI's drivers. period. If you remember correctly, nVidia's 3d drivers were beta when Loki went bust, and they sucked. Not only that, but current linux nvidia drivers don't even use the platform standard DRI interface. You can't expect casual gamers to spend all their time getting 3d working for some BS game, and that is where the money comes from.. casual gamers.

      And the state of drivers, and 3d graphics on high end consumer cards in general on Linux is just bogus, and completely ridiculous.

      id ports to Linux on principle, and their engines are the best. One reason I haven't really played many non id games in the past couple years... (i still run them mostly on windows tho, its a small price to pay for the better performance you get with nvidia/ati's win32 drivers.)

      Let me make my only point clear as day: Linux 3D for video games today is shit. No engine company is going to make any money supporting Linux when there is no hardware out there to run their game.

      --
      Two infinite things: your stupidity and mine. But I'm not sure about the latter. If my sig offends you, I'm sorry.
    37. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by tuba_dude · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's "expensive talking WALKING bullshit" to you bub.

      --
      "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
    38. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by torpor · · Score: 1

      Games companies are in business to make money. They're not charities, and even if they were, even charities need money to operate. Valve is simply making what it believes to be the best decision based on its reading of the market.


      It has nothing to do with anyone asking a game company to be a charity.

      A Linux port - as has been proven by Valve's competitors - of a high-performance, seriously kick ass 3D gaming engine, is not that difficult to do. In fact, some would say that developing under Linux and porting to the other platforms is a sure-fire win-strategy for covering both platforms.

      There isn't a Linux port from Valve, not because its 'hard', or because 'there is no market'. It's because they didn't accomodate *porting* the codebase in their strategy.

      So many other games, really, really good games, are cross-platform coded.

      If HL2 can be ported from Win32->OSX, it can run under Linux ... so why isn't it?

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    39. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by gerddie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1. General development of the Game
      2. Implementation for windows
      3. Implementation for Linux

      If the product is targeted cross-platform then (2) and (3) are only very thin layers on top of (1). In such case a good programmer would implement (1) by using cross-platform APIs like OpenGL, OpenAL, and SDL. Therefore, in a cross-platform environment (1) isn't more expensive than it would be in a single-platform environment. The next good thing about such implementation of (1) is that a port to even more platforme, like MAC or PS2, is also very cheap.
      In the special case of HalfLife2, where the game engine seems to be implemened by using DirectX, a client port is more or less a complete rewrite of the whole engine. Therefore, I don't expect to see ports of the game to any other platforms then MS Windows and X-Box.

      Anyway, there are other games for linux, like BUG-HUNTING 2.6 or so - check it out, it's fun! ;-)

    40. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by asilidae · · Score: 0

      Honestly Doom 3 and Unreal Tournament 2004 aren't really competition for Half-Life 2, just like UT2003 or Quake3 or former Doom versions never got even 1/10th the number of players just Counter-Strike for Half-Life had. Counter-strike 2 is on the way for Half-Life 2, if you didn't know, and you need to own Half-Life to play Counter-Strike... I think it will be the same for version 2 of both games.

      --
      Whats a sig? And how do i append it?
    41. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're an idiot. . Just thought I'd throw that out there.

    42. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incorrect. If we still followed YOUR mindset, every Linux gamer would be bragging about how he plays such great games as Tux and Tetris.

    43. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Too bad Steam is already proving to be DRMified shit. I don't have very high hopes for HL2 anymore. I'm sick of Gabe Newell whining about why he can't get his shitty code to work with nvidia cards when everybody else doesn't seem to have any problems. On the other hand, ID has always done right by me. They kinda invented the whole Genre and their games ALWAYS blow everyone away. So I'm pretty sure Doom3 and Quake4 will rock intently. I hope UT2004 is at least as fun with instagib as UT2003 is. It's not a terribly great game. >>

      Is 'shit' part of the acronym for what you're describing? HL2 probably doesn't hold high hopes for you, either. Who says that no one else is having any problems? Can you do better than Gabe? Really? I didn't think so. ID has done right by you? Am I standing right by you? Nope. Do I consider you to be the Power To Be? Nope. Considering the great writer you are, and impeccable computer programmer you purport yourself to be, I've not been able to deduce how you came up with the statement of "So I'm pretty sure Doom3 and Quake4 will rock intently". You do realize that the words "terribly" and "great" cancel each other out, yes? What you're really trying to say is that you like Doom and Quake more than you like UT?

    44. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by sql*kitten · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I paid 50 bucks for my tin box edition Linux quake3 and installed it on FreeBSD. I paid 40 bucks for my Linux version of RTCW. I paid 50 bucks for UT2003 and it installed on Linux. I paid like 20 for UT because I came it late.

      You might have done - but you are not representative of the games market as a whole. If you were, Loki would still be in business.

    45. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by sql*kitten · · Score: 0, Redundant

      If HL2 can be ported from Win32->OSX, it can run under Linux ... so why isn't it?

      Obviously, because the company believes it can recoup the cost of porting via OSX sales, but that it could not recoup the cost via Linux sales. Just because something can be done theoretically, it doesn't mean it would be practical to do so. Porting and testing aren't free for the company, after all, neither is providing after-sales support which is likely to be far more expensive on Linux than it is on OSX, where there is only on hardware/software combination to worry about.

      Linux on the PC is simply not a viable games platform. That's not to say Linux on a console couldn't be - but on the PC there is too small a market and too many variables to realistically test or support.

    46. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Of course he is not representative of the game market as a hole, if he was, he wouldn't be running Linux at all, but playing a pirated game on a pirated Windows XP.

    47. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't buy hardware from Microsoft-Nvidia XBox corporation for use in a Linux box. Simple.

    48. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Darren+Winsper · · Score: 3, Informative

      NVIDIA's 3D drivers are at least as good as the Windows ones now. ATI's are getting better, Kyro drivers are decent but hampered by the now very obscolete hardware.

      The 3D driver situation in Linux is hardly bogus any more.

    49. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by bernywork · · Score: 1

      I don't agree with you there...

      Loki *ported* existing games, I don't necessarily think that was the way to do it, if they were porting for a userbase of a few of hundred million people, then sure it could have worked, but otherwise I don't think that there was enough Linux gamers to justify this business at the time (4 years time? Sure!)

      Nobody is going to forget Loki and what they did.

      Lets move onto the next point, Linux users are just as willing to fork out the cash, just as the Windows users are.
      I know plenty of tight arsed windows users who are going to be just as unwilling to pay for a game no matter the platform it's played on. Unfortunately these users exist on all platforms, windows, mac, linux and consoles.

      What we are trying to get at here is what we are after:

      The people who *produce* the games in the first place should be looking at doing the port themselves or originally developing an engine / game for Linux. This not only gives them a potential for a bigger market, but given that they support these games for a few years, and with the expansion of linux why not develop for it now?

      (Forgetting the goodwill side of things atm)

      --
      Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown
    50. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by torpor · · Score: 1

      Obviously, because the company believes it can recoup the cost of porting via OSX sales, but that it could not recoup the cost via Linux sales.

      WHAT COST?

      If they plan for it, there is no 'port' required. The project can be multi-platform without requiring weeks and weeks of man-hours to do a 'port'.

      The point is: THEY DIDN'T PLAN TO SUPPORT ANY PLATFORM BUT WINDOWS.

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    51. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Planning something meaning you don't need to test or support it? Even on a completely different operating system?

    52. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      Well it would be nice if principle paid the bills, but it doesn't. See Loki Games.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    53. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by AllUsernamesAreGone · · Score: 5, Informative

      SDL is nothing more than very basic glue, barely enough to provide a portable framework. It does not provide even a fraction of the features Valve would need to make HL2 portable, and none of the OpenGL implementations on linux support the required pixel shader version.

      HL2 is a very different beast to HL1 and even Quake 3 and UT2003, it takes a completely different approach to rendering, and implementing it using the tools available on Linux would be very, very hard.

    54. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      Umm.... no. HL2 on Linux isn't going to convert anyone, so I don't see the Linux user numbers suddenly shooting through the roof. Sometimes a minority group just has to DEAL WITH IT and find something else to champion.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    55. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      Well, who else is pushing the newest cards as hard? Doom 3 is the closest thing to what HL2 is pulling off, and from what I understand their release date is still a ways off so you could EASILY get bitching and moaning from Carmack over the difference in cards.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    56. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      Implementing it on Windows was very, very hard. Only now, porting it is hard as well. The other way around, it might not have been the same story.

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    57. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by iainl · · Score: 1

      "You won't have this luxury come next release! Microsoft has Epic in its pockets"

      Unless I missed some further details (and I'm sure I did), all the recent deal was, was Epic confirming that they will be bringing two games to the XBox. Unreal Championship came quite some time ago to the same platform, and yet Epic are still supporting Linux as well.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    58. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Let's put it this way.

      Ut2003. I bought 4 copies of it BECAUSE it works with linux.

      I gave out 2 of the copies to friends with a copy of redhat.

      I also used to do the same with the other games available from loki, and constantly told people to go to loki.

      I ave over 20 commercial games that work on linux on my shelf. Many more games than I ever have bought for windows, and I know that I am not alone.

      Linux gaming is at the point where Mac Gaming has been for the past 10 years, hopefully it will increase in the future, but the only way to do it is to be good advocates and make noise with our wallets AND tell the companies that you bought their product BECAUSE of the linux version.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    59. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      first off remember that HALF LIFE and VALVE are simply using john karmacks work by releasing a revamped Quake game.

      HL was quake2 with some changes.

      HL2 will be quake 3 with some changes.

      are they fun changes> hell yeah.

      but Quake 3 with the urban terror mod is going to be identical to HL2 counterstrike. and I think the Urban Terror people did it right.

    60. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by bnet41 · · Score: 1

      I think what needs to be said basically is Valve won't do a Linux port just to be nice. They are going to want to make money on it. It would take a lot of man hours to port this game, since it depends on DirectX9 so much, and I just don't think the monetary return is there.

    61. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by cygnusx · · Score: 1

      This post should be modded up, it's living proof that a low slashdot uid doesn't stop you from hammering out gibberish.

    62. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Sevn · · Score: 1

      You mean like, how tuxgames.com is in business? Transgaming? Must be awesome always being right about everything.

      --
      For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    63. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Sevn · · Score: 1

      Oh, how cute. You annoy people that blow your points out of the water by posting as an anonymous coward.

      --
      For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    64. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Sevn · · Score: 1

      Damn you british girls are touchy. Actually, you can't pirate the Linux version because it requires a valid product code just like the windows version. Once again, I'm impressed with how right you are. And ditch the language nazi thing. It's so british.

      --
      For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    65. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by sql*kitten · · Score: 4, Informative

      f they plan for it, there is no 'port' required. The project can be multi-platform without requiring weeks and weeks of man-hours to do a 'port'.

      You've still got to test on every platform you support, you still have to train your support staff on every platform you support, etc. Have you ever worked on a large, commercial multi-platform product? If you had, you would know that the code is only part of the work involved, and over the lifecycle of the product, it's even just a small fraction of the work.

    66. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Sevn · · Score: 1

      Damn. Three completely pointless anonymous coward posts for one post that makes you look as stupid as you are. Look, it's not my fault you are some sort of Microsoft apoligist to the point you feel you have to say derogatory things about Linux gamers. There is some grand war going on. This isn't some side you are on. Someday when you are 50 and alone you won't look back on this and laugh because you won't even remember it. That's how insignificant your bias is.

      --
      For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    67. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by minus9 · · Score: 1

      "No engine company is going to make any money supporting Linux when there is no hardware out there to run their game. "

      I get around 130 fps in quake 3 arena on linux and an average of around 80 in UT2003 with everything turned up all the way.

      That dosen't seem so bad to me.

    68. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Nurgled · · Score: 1

      You expect everyone to pay again for a ported binary?

      id's model makes more sense. You buy the Windows version at your favourite games retailer, then you download the port of the executable and run it alongside the data from the CD. That way they don't have to waste money producing linux-only game boxes and CDs that only a minority will buy.

      The next logical step would be to include the linux port on the disk with the Windows version, so that both binaries are available right off the bat. I'm told Unreal Tournament 2003 did this, but I do not own that game to check.

    69. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by ExEleven · · Score: 0

      You have a good point, I think it will have a Linux Client personally. Well I hope it does, Unreal 2003 goes pretty sweet on Linux. Some of the older games where baddly ported, so if they do port it, I hope they do a good job.

      After seeing the Half-Life 2 Trailer I was suprised with how cool it will be. I have tried the Doom 3 Alpha which was not near as cool as Half-Life 2 (However pretty cool). I only just found out about UT2004, but it should be kickass. Ports of mods like Counter Strike, and others is another thing altogether.

      I think there will be a Linux Client for Half-Life 2. Its sensible these days, I heard a rumor that I want to look into about the PS3 being Linux Based. However that is meerly a rumor, but that might meen if Half-Life 2 runs on the PS3, it will run on Linux.

      We can only hope, its upto Sierra.

      (Setting up a petition on petetiononline.com might be worth a shot).

    70. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by jpop32 · · Score: 1

      The problem is, while geeks talk the talk, they don't walk the walk with their wallets.

      That is of minor importance, IMHO. What is of importance if the fact that for every Linux gamer, there are 100 windows gamers, if not more. And, since developing for two platforms would not double the size of the potential market, but increase it only by a fraction, their decision becomes clear.

      In fact, I'd say that any games released on Linux are more of a political statement and betting on (possible) future than a bussiness-driven decision. And Valve possibly doesn't see it as an option worth pursuin, at least not right now when they are in a crunch with windows version.

    71. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by gurumeditationerror · · Score: 1

      The sad reality of it is that games are what drives the computing industry, without all these lovely FPS's we probably would be running machines that arn't half as fast today

      The only thing that is holding linux back is games; we all know it. When all major games are released for linux we'll see some real uptake.

    72. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      You expect everyone to pay again for a ported binary?

      Loki's business model (license a game then port it) required that people did pay for the Linux version. If people had waited, not buying the Windows version and onyl buying the Linux version, it may have worked. But what people expected was that Loki would do the port for free. Loki got no revenue from the original publisher, remember.

    73. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by another_mr_lizard · · Score: 1

      "It's almost impossible to get people to install linux when they could be playing BF1942 or C&C:Generals instead"

      Surely the point of LAN parties is to play games and swap pr0n?

      Home users are not going to jump to linux for games until there is a respectable selection of games that are easy to configure.

      --
      "My parents were strict, but they never pitted me against livestock" - Doug Stanhope
    74. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I beg to differ, both driver offerings from ati and nvidia are much much, MUCH improved since the days of loki. If you can't get them working at a level comparable to windows, then you're a lazy retard.

    75. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Mr_Silver · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I agree whole-heartedly. This is 2003, and the biggest game of the year locks you down to a propriotary platform...

      I hate to break it to you but with a very small number of exceptions, every game released in the last 10 years locks you down to a propriatory platform. I can't see this trend changing for the next couple of years at least.

      This would be more news-worthy if there was going to be a Linux version - rather than there not being one.

      --
      Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
    76. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have not spent a dime on MS software for years now. I pay for RH, and bought all the Loki games they released. I did buy RTCW which was only sold for wintendo, but I only play it from Linux.

      I will pay money for Linux products but will not pay a dime to MS. I do have a win partition but didn't pay a dime for it and never will. Last time I used win it was to install RTCW. 2 years ago...

    77. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by another_mr_lizard · · Score: 1

      "The only thing that is holding linux back is games; we all know it. When all major games are released for linux we'll see some real uptake." Sorry, but thats total crap.

      Who do you expect to make the move to Linux exactly? Whether you like it or not most "regular" users don't care about browser wars, DOJ cases and all the rest of it - they just want their internet, mail, MSN, games, etc. Certainly in my experience I have never met one of these "I just want it to work dammit" types who would ever have the patience to deal with a terminal.

      Driving regular users to Linux will not happen by matching everything that XP/OSX and the rest can do, but by giving regular users another use to their boxes that the competition doesn't have.

      --
      "My parents were strict, but they never pitted me against livestock" - Doug Stanhope
    78. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There *WAS* a Linux client.

      Microsoft will change that.

    79. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by LMCBoy · · Score: 1

      Now, it's very nice of those folks at ID et al that are pretty much helping out Linux-users by taking Linux R&D costs and include them in the windows-variant.

      This is wrong. ID et al. are not just "being nice" to Linux gamers. In the FA (which I'm sure you R'd ;), these other companies justify the development costs of a linux client as a quid-pro-quo to linux gamers for running the linux server. I think this is a very interesting (not to mention valid) way of looking at it.

      The dedicated linux server has played no small part in Half-Life's unprecedented longevity among the top ten PC best-sellers. To this day, according to the article, the number of people playing a HL variant online outnumbers the number of players of all other FPS games combined. Many (most?) of those servers are running on Linux. Valve could-and-should show a little appreciation for that.

      --
      Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
    80. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " I agree whole-heartedly. This is 2003, and the biggest game of the year locks you down to a propriotary platform. This is an inexcusable insult on Valve's behalf."

      Did you rant like this because GTA3 was released for the PS2 but not the Xbox?

      Or because Halo was released for the Xbox but not the PS2?

      It's the same thing.

      It's called "capitalism". The games makers do it for the money. As far as PC games go, Windows IS the market.

      And before there's scream for a GPL'd HL2, forget it. The kind of cash this project cost to produce, you'd never see an "open" licensed version of the game. No-one could afford it.

      It's not an insult. You're just not on their radar. There really is no money in Linux gaming. Look at Hyperion games... one of their employees said on a number of their games, *Amiga* sales were higher than Linux sales... And the Amiga's pretty damn' dead.

    81. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, we got SDL from Executor

    82. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >
      Oh, how short the geek memory. Remember Loki? A company that tried to bring mainstream games to the Linux platform?
      >
      >
      Bullshit. They brought crappy FPS shooters to Linux that nobody cared about.

      The *SHIT* FPS Shooter and other Windows based titles that flooded the PC Game market and *DICKHEADS* like you ran around prasing for being utter garabage,especially after Windows 95/98 was released was one of the things that caused me to abandon the PC as a gaming platform and jump ship to the PS1 and PS2.

    83. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by torpor · · Score: 4, Informative

      In fact, yes I have worked on a large, commercial multi-platform product, or I wouldn't have this point of view.

      Platform-testing? Big deal. What do you think Internet beta's are for? Support staff? Last I heard, most of the big-game companies *shopped their support services* to 3rd parties ... again, big deal.

      No, you're just not getting the point. The point is, a 'port' is not expensive if you don't do it last. If you do multi-platform development concurrently, and have a technical strategy in place to accomodate it, then it doesn't cost any more than to just do one-platform...

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    84. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. They brought crappy FPS shooters to Linux that nobody cared about.

      So you're saying they went bust because they picked the wrong products then? That's still their fault.

      Hell, if you know what should be done, why don't *you* set up business porting Linux games? Why not start with Half Life 2?

    85. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by localghost · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My Ti4800 running nVidia driver version 1.0-4496 disagrees with you. I average 80fps in Enemy Territory at 1280x1024. I don't think I'd do much better in Windows.

    86. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are by far, not, the typical Linux user.

    87. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Chazmyrr · · Score: 1

      The other way around, the graphics might not have been nearly as good. Graphics sell games. The better the graphics, they better the game sells.

    88. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought 4 copies

      yuppie

    89. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by GweeDo · · Score: 4, Informative

      "none of the OpenGL implementations on linux support the required pixel shader version"

      You will have to tell that to my GeforceFX5900 and Unified Nvidia Driver that has full support for all the functions you speak of via nvidia cg or via another none ARB rendering path. Now...since there is only one other chip maker that is making a card with PS2.0 (as people like to call it) that would be ATI...you only in turn have one company not supporting the technology they would need in linux. ATI has always been a joke in the 3d market with Linux so this is nothing new and Nvidia has a greater market share of high end 3d cards in both the Windows and the Linux market....so who cares?

      They could have easily written that engine using OpenGL and had a VERY portable engine. But naw...they are getting some luvin from MS and ATI, so what do you expect.

    90. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by kikensei · · Score: 4, Informative

      OpenGL has most if not all of the features that DX9 specs (possibly more). Further, HL2 will scale down considerably to support older machines that don't have DX9 capable grahics cards. Even if Linux doesn't get every shiny sunbeam, it would be an enormous coup to get a Linux HL2 port. I just don't get why devs won't do as the Carmack does, and start with OpenGL to begin with. It gives ports a much better chance. Just 'cause Carmack targeted DX7 with Doom3, doesn't mean that you can't get DX9 quality effects out of OpenGL if you plan for it. Not to mention, I'll wager that Carmack's DX7 Doom3 engine will compete with Valve's source as the best engine on the market. Anyway, for the next 4 years it will be Doom3 engine games being played on Linux and HL2could help this OS take off on the desktop front like almost nothing else.

    91. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Hard_Code · · Score: 1

      Half Life 2 is strongly tied to DirectX and Microsoft's shader language. Unless OpenGL gets its act together and finally releases a set of high level extensions (OpenGL 2 or whatever the next rev is), it will continue to lose ground to game makers who are not ideologically pro-OpenGL. Traditionally "open" standards/projects cling to a not entirely un-elitist notion of the "correct" way of doing things, as opposed to the way the consumer (game makers) want to do things. It's no wonder that game makers choose the easiest path to profit. If you want them, then cater to them (hell, release a reimplementation that sits on OpenGL, who cares).

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    92. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by danrees · · Score: 1

      I don't play that many games anymore, so now I am only interested in buying those that I can play on my OS of choice - Linux.

      So why would games companies give a flying fuck what you think? Think about it...

    93. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Ti4800 running nVidia driver version 1.0-4496 disagrees with you. I average 80fps in Enemy Territory at 1280x1024. I don't think I'd do much better in Windows.

      I assume that the grandparent post was referring to features (maybe OpenGL 1.4 support?), not raw speed. Of course, the "grandparent" didn't mention any specifics about what was lacking except for the "not using DRI" bit (why do these vague, unsupported whines get modded up on Slashdot?) so it's hard to argue this point.

    94. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "At least we got SDL out of it."

      WRONG. SDL was around well before Loki. Loki only hired the main author / maintainer of SDL when it already existed.

    95. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by snippy · · Score: 1

      Well, speaking as someone who just bought a new machine from Dell with a Nvidia Quadro FX 1000 video card, running Debian Unstable, I really didn't have to do much work to get accelerated 3D.

      I also dual boot this machine to WindowsXP, and I have America's Army: Operations (which is free BTW, and has windows, mac, and linux clients available) installed under both OS's.

      There is absolutely no difference under linux, the framerate's the same, sound works great under alsa. AFAIK AA:O is using the UT engine.

      --
      "Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentation of their women." - Conan
    96. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 1

      SDL is nothing more than very basic glue, barely enough to provide a portable framework.

      And it all honesty, it's not even very good, just portable.

    97. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 1

      I agree whole-heartedly. This is 2003, and the biggest game of the year locks you down to a propriotary platform. This is an inexcusable insult on Valve's behalf.

      How is this any different than GTA3 being a PS2 exclusive for over a year, Halo only being released for the Xbox, FFX only being released for the PS2, Metroid Prime and Mario Sunshine only being released for the Game Cube...sounds like business as usual to me.

    98. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Repugnant_Shit · · Score: 1

      I don't understand what you mean. I can play Enemy Territory, UT2003, Q3 natively, and they run great. I can use WineX and play GTA:Vice City, Warcraft 3, etc. and they all work great. Nvidia's Linux drivers work wonderfully.

    99. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Nurgled · · Score: 1

      Loki's business model was broken. For one thing, some of the games they ported had been available for Windows before Loki was well-known or possibly even existed, so users bought the Windows versions unaware that they'd be ported later. Had Loki sold a replacement binary without the data at a much reduced price, requiring users to scoop the original game out of the bargain bucket for a few bucks, they may have done better. They'd probably have to restrict themselves to online distribution rather than retail boxes in that case, however.

      A far better situation would be for the original developer to create portable code and simultaneously release all of the versions. Since versions for Linux (and, I assume, MacOS X) will, at first, sell far less copies than Windows, it makes sense to bundle them all on the same disc to avoid pressing copies which will just end up sitting in a warehouse not selling. Later, when people get the idea, selling separate versions might become viable but I still don't really see the point when a one-disc-fits-all situation obviously reduces unsold copies.

      The Unreal engine is a good example of portable code. I'm speaking of the original Unreal engine here, but I recall that all of its subsystems were pluggable so that (for example) while the original Windows release supported software rendering and 3Dfx they were later able to supply new plugins to go through DirectX and OpenGL for newer cards.

      I'm assuming the architecture of the more recent engines, which were built on the work done for the first, is similar. This means that the porting effort for the Linux version was reduced to writing a new driver or porting an existing driver for each subsystem and then recompiling the core. Far easier than taking Half-life 2's code, which uses DirectX 9 directly.

    100. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      finally, someone in this thread that has business sense.

      hl2 is d3d based not openGL based. Im sure that if openGL offered more then d3d that this is the way they would go, but it doesnt look that way so linux users will be SOL. Oh well. Are most of you still not able to dual boot into windows? There are lots of tutorials out there lol....

    101. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need more than 10 people who want to play the Linux version before they will even think of developing it.

    102. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From a person that obviously hasn't seen the Half-Life 2 demo...

    103. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by BadmanX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They could have easily written that engine using OpenGL...

      Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself.

    104. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duh, HL2 is the first game to actually use and abuse DX9. Gabe isn't whining about jack. Nvidia took shortcuts and still don't have DX9 optimized drivers 2 years later. 2 fucking years. How did ATI accomplish this when they have a history of having shitty non working drivers?

      It's because Nvidia was full of shit and relied on brand recognition to sell and skipped the part about designing their card to actually work well in DX9. They lost this round but who knows they could make a comeback on next years card.

    105. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by MichaelKVance · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Eh? Of course Loki was mismanaged, but there was no way we could have IPOd and 'cashed out (and this was recognized internally by management)', nor was that the focus. And even if the company has been managed properly, there's no way it would still be around. One poster mentioned that Linux gaming is just like Mac gaming has been for the last 10 years--this is bullshit. There are at least three Mac porting houses that are alive and well, and new games are released all the time for the Mac. I have Warcraft 3, Baldur's Gate 2, Icewind Dale, No One Lives Forever, Civilization 3, and Jedi Knight 2 sitting in my Dock right now. Linux gaming is at the point where it can support one person (Ryan Gordon) doing porting work full-time.

      m.

      --
      "Sebastian you're in a mess. They called you King of all the Hipsters, is it true or are you still the Queen?" -- B
    106. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by gurumeditationerror · · Score: 1

      Driving regular users to Linux will not happen by matching everything that XP/OSX and the rest can do, but by giving regular users another use to their boxes that the competition doesn't have.

      I agree that you need to offer more but you need to be able to offer what the competitor has plus what you offer.

      All my linux using friends and people that are open minded to the idea of using another OS than windows always sigh and say
      "If only I could play my games I wouldn't need windows anymore"
      We could talk all day about what linux offers extra, the majority of us are intimatly familiar with that.

      We have practicaly everything but major game support. I'm not saying having the games will suddenly make linux better; I'm saying that if you can play all the new games on linux thats one of the last major reasons to keep using windows gone.

    107. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by FroMan · · Score: 1

      You seemed to get a couple negative responses to you post. Myself, I want to chime in behind you and say good job.

      Last spring my wife and I bought Win2k as our last microsoft purchase. At home we currently run linux for the majority of our time. My wife maintains the church bulletin and has been using office 97 until recently, now she isusing OO.org.

      We also game on a regular basis, from EverQuest (up until last spring) and WCIII (until they busted FreeCraft, right before we were going to buy the espansion), and a number of other games.

      When Bioware finally had NWN hit the street for linux we made the purchase within a month. Again, a month after the SoU expansion for NWN came out, we had that also from tuxgames. As the next expansion nears we'll probably pre-order it from tuxgames also. To us, supporting the linux gaming market is important, especially since we will not be buying another MS operating system, so once 2k isn't supported anymore we will not be able to play games on windows.

      Game support isn't the only thing that needs to be supported though. Hardware also needs to have advocates behind it. We also make sure when we purchase new video cards that they are from companies that support linux, especially the ones that are just beginning support. As such our last two video cards have been ATI, and when we have crash bugs, we let them know. If the support is lagging, we let them know. We go to the feedback sites. ATI's drivers had lagged quite badly since last november when their initial support for the >7500 cards came out. We hit their linux drivers page every day. We used their issues page when XFree86 bumped to 4.3 from 4.2 because their drivers no longer worked.

      My point is in full agreement with yours. Only through advocacy is linux gaming going to arrive. Sure, the games we play in linux may not have the fastest FPS, but they play well enough. Enough to make sure server logs show "linux" in them. We purchase linux games, we do not pirate them cause we can, we make sure that the companies supporting linux hardware and software get our dollars.

      --
      Norris/Palin 2012
      Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
    108. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by BadmanX · · Score: 1

      If Valve thinks that supporting Linux will be more trouble than it is worth, then that is Linux's problem, not Valve's.

    109. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by tonywong · · Score: 1

      Why not form a trust for this? Get a lawyer, and everyone who's willing to buy this game put up their $50 in said lawyer's trust, and Valve will get the $$ when it's released in X timeframe. If not, people get a refund. Lawyer may even do it based on the interest alone.

      That way, people can put up or shut up, and the company can be guaranteed of a certain amount coming in from a Linux port.

    110. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why they would support a people who believe everything should be free? It is no surprise company like Loki go out of business.

      You can find free games for Linux, but they can not be commercial quality. Rarely you can combine free and high quality in one game.

      Company executive observeing the Linux community, and he think "hey look these guys use free OS, they don't like spend money".

      If you want play games, buy console or cheap MS Windows computer.

    111. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by BurkeChowdah · · Score: 0

      I definitely agree. But there are not many that do this, for good reason. Take Loki Games for example. They put a huge effort into supporting the Linux gaming community. Look where it got them. I don't think the Linux gaming community should be ignored, but I definitely understand they limited interest it recieves. Anyone that knows anything about business understands that it's a very risky prospect to invest what's required in porting a game to linux, for the relatively small returns it's going to gain. I'd like to see a number on this, but I would guess that 50% or better of linux ports are just a donation to the charity that is Linux. They have to sell a pretty fair number of games to make back the money they spend on porting. This is the same reason they don't port much to Mac. If you make a Windows game, you have 90% of the planet (or whatever the % is now) and millyuns and millyuns of potential customers, so even if a VERY small portion of those people pick it up, it still will work out. However, the number of Linux gamers (the REAL Linux gamers, that aren't just content to dual boot) is so small that it's a very risky proposition to release a linux port.

      --
      (insert attempt to be witty here)
    112. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Even if the management were better, one still has the quandry of only something like a 3% installed base for desktop systems. Games are complex and a total rework to expand your market by a few percent simply doesn't make sense.

    113. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1

      A Linux minority will become a a Linux majority not by flaming Valve for not porting the game to your OS (even when Half-Life 2 requires certain things like pixel shader features and so forth which freeware graphics/audio frameworks on Linux do not provide whatsoever...but that doesn't matter as long as you can flame some company for no valid reason).

      Linux has many other things keeping it in the minority in the gaming department. Your bitching about it on Slashdot won't change that.

      It's a server OS with some desktop environments for those admin-types and hacker-learners who like the familiarity of their server OS at home. I'm sorry, but that's how Linux is right now, and contrary what the raving zealots you run across now and then say, Linux won't be there for a number of years (and by then, Longhorn will be out, further setting things back). The nature of Linux itself is of a server operating system and not a hardcore gaming experience. I'll go so far as to say that it's an admirable feature of Windows that it crosses so many boundaries with varying degrees of success.

      People will probably consider my post a "Troll" but I won't be surprised. I'm tired of this victim mentality.

      If we followed your mindset, we'd still think the world was flat.

      Utter nonsense. If you followed my mindset, you'd realize Half-Life 2 is not only not viable on Linux, it's impossible. The world being round is a bit more viable, don't you think? Seeing as how the world actually is round and all.

      Completely different situation, but Slashdot posters LOVE analogies and metaphors. Especially if they can use an automobile analogy.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    114. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by HopeUnknown · · Score: 1
      This is 2003, and the biggest game of the year locks you down to a propriotary platform.

      Kind of like Grand Theft Auto, Vice City, and every Final Fantasy game did? Is this really that different?

    115. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by supun · · Score: 1

      I don't know if it will or will not convert people to Linux, however it agrees with my belief/rules of "you don't support me, I don't support you." Since I don't run Windows, not releasing a Linux client fits into the "don't support me" category.

      For example, I'm a mods/mutator creator for UT2003. If they stop porting to Linux, I can't play anymore, so there is no need for me to create mods and mutators. So not only do they lose a player who will pay for the new game, the lose the work I would do for their game. And I have been told that my stuff is the only reason why some people play UT2003. :)

      --
      :w!
    116. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by NFNNMIDATA · · Score: 1

      Hehe, saw a pile of those tins at Half-Price Books, I think the price was like $2.98 (if not it was well under $10). I seem to recall that the linux version included the windows version as well, but no one seemed to give a rat's ass as they just sat there gleaming in their pointlessness.

    117. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by TrentC · · Score: 1

      According to beyondunreal.com, 2004 will have a Linux Client.

      Yes, and Neverwinter Nights was supposed to be a simultaneous release for Windows, MacOS and Linux. Lots of press releases early on about how great things were going on all three platforms, then mysteriously, it seemed like the MacOS and Linux clients were falling behind. But don't worry, we're making progress, they might just be delayed until after the box ships.

      As it turned out, they hadn't really started either client. Even though there are Linux and MacOS versions now, neither come with the Aurora toolset -- you can only play the game, not create your own modules. (At least you can use your Windows purchase on Linux for the CD key; you have to go and buy the MacOS version all over again!)

      So think long and hard about "supporting" companies that "support" us. I'll believe in UT2004 for Linux when I see it, and not one second before.

      Jay (=

    118. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by nule.org · · Score: 1

      Go od for you. Here's my collection:

      Civ: CTP
      Q3
      UT (2 copies)
      Myth2
      Railroad tycoon 2
      Postal
      Raptor (port of old apogee shooter)
      Pontifex 2
      Tribes 2 (2 copies)
      NWN (2 copies)
      UT2k3 (2 copies)

      and I'm sure that when UT2K4 comes out, I'll get two copies of that too. (When friends come over to LAN I like to have an extra machine setup so we don't spend all our time trying to get the games to work.) I'll probably pick up one or two of the NWN expansions as they come out as well.

      Sure I miss playing some of the shiny-new games my 'doze running friends play. But it's not worth the trouble of paying $200 to MS or pirating XP (or even the iffy support of WineX) just to play a game. Critical mass is building in the Linux world and soon we'll see the game developers doing more ports. Already the list of what's available on tuxgames.com and what is coming soon is encouraging.

    119. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      Call me a purist, but I'll take gameplay over graphics any day. I want to know when someone in the PC market is going to start making games which can compete with Nintendo's class. :-/

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    120. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, looks like somebody doesn't speak English.

      Idiot.

    121. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Time+Doctor · · Score: 1

      ut2003 for Linux was on the retail CD-ROMs, there is no reason to not expect ut2004 to have the same thing.

      --
      Check out ioquake3.org for a great, free, First-Person Shooter engine!
    122. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      In French, "Terrible" can mean "great"

    123. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by snak0rific · · Score: 1

      the man who says something can't be done shouldn't interrupt the man who is doing it.

      --
      -- "Put on your big girl panties and lift!"
    124. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Uncle+Eazy · · Score: 1

      Talking about selling software for money? On slashdot? Blasphemy!!!

      Games companies are in business to make money. They're not charities, and even if they were, even charities need money to operate. Valve is simply making what it believes to be the best decision based on its reading of the market.

    125. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by torpor · · Score: 1

      What makes you that they *specifically* are not supporting linux 'because its more trouble than its worth'?

      Is it 'obvious' that they're not doing a Linux port because of the trouble, or because of something else? Because, fact is, there's no compelling *technological* reason not to do a full, 3-platform (Linux/OSX/WIN32) game engine from the gate. Technologically, there's no hitch.

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    126. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Mongoose · · Score: 1

      I hope no ones gets another libelgram from the evil toll booths. ( inside joke ) UT2k4 will have vechicles and stuff, so that's different for those who don't follow epic.

      Yeah, Zk - I bought just about every loki game and the sony linux kit for PS2. I also buy hardware with *advertised linux support when possible. I then *register said hardware to let them know I use Linux.

      Voting with dollars is nice, but it doesn't mean everyone will support you with a low market share. Linux servers should be supported with Linux clients, but the world isn't fair.

    127. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such as BadmanX - who obviously knows little to nothing about 3D programming. OpenGL is the most widely used standard and it is used by the Unreal and Quake engines.

      HTH

    128. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by L7_ · · Score: 1

      But isn't Doom 3 DirectX 9.0 compatible?

      That means that it will be running solely under windows, and *never* be ported to linux/MacOS X.

    129. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you can be directx and opengl compatible. Most of the pre-rendering should be abstracted away from the rendering of the game. The problem with developing a game in directx is that developers who use DirectX often use it to do pre-rendering chores as well as the final rendering, itself. The directx system is higher level, and allows a game developer to use it's own methods for pre-rendering. IF the developer goes this route, you essentially need an entire rewrite of the game to get it to work on OpenGL.

    130. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by tntguy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Graphics only sell games until word gets out that a it's crap; so only the initial release will really generate any revenue.

      Good game play keeps people coming back.

    131. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Sevn · · Score: 1

      Actually, NVidia got into a pissing match with Microsoft over how they do shading. Microsoft wanted to force them to give up the technology to be included in DX9 for free if they wanted to play. NVidia bulked and is now paying for it. Despite all this, Doom3 is DX9 and runs 20 percent faster on NVidia cards in it's E3 incarnation. Carmac didn't notice any 66 percent slowdown. Kinda neat huh. Of course, the other side of that coin is that Carmac was flipping PISSED when ATI released that Alpha Doom3 demo as a marketing stunt. He's been shunning them ever since. So ATI responded by immediately showering Valve with attention, and crawling up Microsoft's ass. But you were close. And no, Gabe Newell is no John Carmac. This is the first game/engine they've put out on their own. Their huge seller "half-life" became truly popular because of an after market mod that they didn't even do. The half-life engine was a modified ID engine. Given Valve's willingness to outright lie about issues with their games in the past and blame them on anything but their crappy code, I definitely do not have high hopes for HL2.

      --
      For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    132. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by mr.+methane · · Score: 1

      I *really* like linux. I use it on a stack of servers, and I have a couple of linux workstations, which are just great for the power that the unix command line (and utilities like awk, grep, etc) all offer.

      But unix as a gaming platform? I just don't really see the value, other than the small marketing boost. Games are designed to be sold at high volume and low margin; if you spend half an hour on the phone with one user who can't get the opengl driver running, you eat the profit for 50 copies of the title.

      Me, I like unix for what it's good at, and I like WinXP for what it does well.

    133. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I also used to do the same with the other games available from loki, and constantly told people to go to loki.

      ... and despite all your advocacy and artificial stimulation of the market, Loki still ended up going under because that was not enough of a market for them to be profitable. That says a lot more about the Linux gaming market than what you've explicitly noted in your post.

    134. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice.... got any other lies?

      Loki DIED because the leaders killed it, they milked the company for every dine ,robbed the employees, and then happily screwed them all in the end.

      Idiots like you are the reason that this crap that "linux games are dead" get's spread and hide the damn scam artists that drive great companies and coders into oblivion....

      so go screw off mister know nothing. This Lumpy dude is right, you are wrong.

    135. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need a valid product code to play single player, just a warezd one.

      You would think that someone with such a low ID would know when he's being trolled...

    136. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by Ringlord · · Score: 1

      I am sure Bioware appreciated me buying their game. The companies that don't have a Linux version don't get my money.

      This is not a religious issue for me. I don't use Windows anymore, so I need a version for Linux if I should buy a game.

    137. Re:why not support the companies that support us? by jjhlk · · Score: 1

      And it hurts! I love Half-life, and really like the card's ATI is making... but I'm weening myself off of Windows. My next hardware upgrade is including an nvidia card at this point. And I guess I'll be playing Unreal Tournament 2004.

  5. A Good Thing(tm) by John+Hurliman · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Less time wasted on video games, more time for programming.

    1. Re: A Good Thing(tm) by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > Less time wasted on video games, more time for programming.

      Now that is just sick.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  6. Oh dear by cca93014 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Sidestepping, for the moment, that there are only five game engines represented there (Unreal, Q3, NWN, T2, and Q2) and they are mostly all first person shooters and that way too many game names include a colon

    Whoever said the the Linux gaming scene was full of shit?

    1. Re:Oh dear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Informative!? Guess the moderators' funny bones are broken this time of year...

  7. My plan is simple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    How will the rest of the Linux gaming community react to the release of Half-Life 2?
    I dunno about the other three people in this category, but I'm just gonna walk in the office with a rocket launcher. Fun will ensue!
    1. Re:My plan is simple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      USE your MACHINE GUN-ARM!

      I miss UCB. I also miss when my computer didn't argue with me. Yes Slashdot lameness filter, I know it's like yelling. They were yelling that in the show.

  8. It's all about design choices. by maximum_high · · Score: 0

    Rarely do you see games using DirectX ported to Linux. Perhaps a better design choice was to use OpenGL to implement HL2. Although, the newest video cards by ATI and NVIDIA are optimized for DirectX (well ... at least ATI) so HL2 graphical features may not be elaborated if implemented OpenGL.

    Design choices, nothing more.

  9. Aiming for the Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fact is that VALVe is a company. A company which, obviously enough, wants to make a profit. The easiest and most effective way to do this is to pander to the widest possible audience -- Windows users. Linux, as a gaming platform, has been lacking since it came into being. The answer to the question of Linux gaming won't be discovered for a while to come. In the meantime, the more people that run Linux servers for Half-Life and Half-Life 2, the more VALVe will take notice. This isn't something that will be won quickly, but with a little patience and understanding of the ideas behind VALVe's business practices, Linux will have a version of Half-Life all its own.

    1. Re:Aiming for the Market by ecchi_0 · · Score: 1
      I don't understand the correlation between a large amount of Linux dedicated servers and a large amount of would-be Linux players.

      Linux is a server OS. Wouldn't that make it a GREAT choice for running a dedicated server? Besides, most people that would run a dedicated server for the game are the same people that own and enjoy the game already. I know I wouldn't run my dedicated server if I stopped playing Half-Life.

    2. Re:Aiming for the Market by Aadain2001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He brings up both of those points in the article, so I'm assuming you stopped reading at the title of the story and hit the reply button.

      He says exactly what you said: no one will get rich, or even make a profit, selling Linux games (just check out Loki!). His angle is that since Linux gamers have really helped out on the dedicated server side with Half Life 1, maybe its time to expect Valve to return the favor a little. Most of the lastest-n-greatest games/engines have native Linux versions, so it is technically possible if you keep portability in mind (and isn't that just plain good programing?). Of all the big game producers, Valve is one of the few that do great FPS that don't have Linux ports.

      I want to play HL2, and I will buy HL2, but I'm not going to buy it until a) WineX is reported to run it with no problems or b) there is a native Linux port. I will not use Windows for it. But that's just me. No skin off Valve's back if they don't get my money since I'm not their target market.

      --
      Space for rent, inquire within
    3. Re:Aiming for the Market by BlueLightning · · Score: 4, Informative

      Loki went out of business due to bad management, not lack of interest from gamers. Check out this article.

    4. Re:Aiming for the Market by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
      Yeah, and as a company they need to get off the MS teat NOW! Espically with the new Macs soon to be king of the computer hill [for a short time], there's no excuse to write non-portable code. Add that to the frightening rate MS is gobbling up all the PC licenses for Xbox and the writing is on the wall...Unless big name makers move to linux NOW there will be no more PC gaming in the very near future!

      The linux community has created some way cool options for game companies [think Knoppix] if they would just USE them. With a little help, PC games could stand on their own legs with only the game devs and hardware makers getting the take...someone just needs to take that first step with a AAA class title!

    5. Re:Aiming for the Market by TheSunborn · · Score: 1

      Did they? Try to look at their sales numbers. If a port of a top game don't even sell 10.000 copies there are no way to survive for a company.

      Martin

    6. Re:Aiming for the Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The article says Loki had very low cash flow due to the lack of sales.

      its biggest seller not handled by MacMillan had moved only 5,000 copies, == Not Enough To Make Money

    7. Re:Aiming for the Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, cause Linux is obviously a charity case - time for VALVe to make a donation you think? Obviously that's what you hope for, since the Loki experience proved that Linux users are pirates and will not pay for software (worse than Windows users I might add - and even just 5% of Windows players buying a game is plenty of sales).

      Or they could just say "Fuck you, Linux losers!" Yeah, I think that's more likely.

      Fuck you, Linux loser.

    8. Re:Aiming for the Market by Wehesheit · · Score: 0

      Why the hell is everyone forgetting ID software? there WILL be doom 3 for linux. Is ID that much more capable?

      I will be buying Doom 3 when it comes out and I'm not so sure about HL2.

      Loki games died long ago, Linux has grown considerably since then and companies who continue to ignore the market are going to lose money.

      --
      This P.I.G. will walk on the water, This P.I.G. will walk on the sea, This P.I.G. will walk whereever he wants.
    9. Re:Aiming for the Market by Natalie's+Hot+Grits · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to mention that the retail copy of Quake3 for Linux didn't come out to stores for 3 months after win32... and that it wasn't on sale for promo anywhere like the windows version was.... ... oops, I guess none of you bothered to check the shelves before making BS claims about shitty sales. Quake3 for Linux would have been a hit if it was priced at the same levels and sold at the same time. It wasn't, and it wasn't so it didn't. period.

      --
      Two infinite things: your stupidity and mine. But I'm not sure about the latter. If my sig offends you, I'm sorry.
    10. Re:Aiming for the Market by NonSequor · · Score: 1

      They might have been able to scrape by if they just sold the games through their website and rather than printing boxes and manuals just send out CDs with the game and a PDF of the manual. This would also have the advantage of being quicker to manufacture, so they could order them in small lots and order more as needed. If I recall correctly, each game was ported by two or three programmers. If they did it right, their biggest expense would be licensing fees.

      What really killed them was Draeker's absurdly high expectations and extravagance. Collector's edition tins? If they had focused on starting small and building from there they might have been able to get more venture capital. Their massive debts scared off creditors.

      But now, the idea of a Linux games company is cursed. It's going to be a VERY long time before anyone can get venture capital for a Linux games company.

      --
      My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
    11. Re:Aiming for the Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      same here

    12. Re:Aiming for the Market by _Upsilon_ · · Score: 1
      His angle is that since Linux gamers have really helped out on the dedicated server side with Half Life 1, maybe its time to expect Valve to return the favor a little.

      Well, it's time to withdraw the help. If they won't return a client to us, don't run the server.

    13. Re:Aiming for the Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Return the favour"?

      Why?

      Linux *GAMERS* did squat for Valve. If anyone helped, it was Linux *coders*.

      Valve make the server available 'cause ISPs *like* Linux servers. Most ISPs run Linux or FreeBSD. Since FreeBSD runs Linux binaries, that means with that one server binary you can run pretty much anywhere.

      The original HL Linux server was at the behest of ISPs. I remember on HL's launch, the server was NT-only. And it broke about once every 3-4 hours, depending how heavy useage was. At the time, I worked for an ISP and had to restart the damn things.

    14. Re:Aiming for the Market by _|()|\| · · Score: 1
      Not to mention that the retail copy of Quake3 for Linux didn't come out to stores for 3 months after win32

      Not to mention that you could download the Linux binaries. Quake 3 for Linux was doomed from the start. Its sales figures tell you nothing about the Linux gaming market.

    15. Re:Aiming for the Market by bigpat · · Score: 1

      "The answer to the question of Linux gaming won't be discovered for a while to come. "

      The answer is easy. Just make games for Linux.

      That business decision is becoming easier too. Do you want to spend your money on Microsoft licensing and business arrangements? Or would you rather spend it on making and marketing your own products? Microsoft has proven time and time again not to be a good business partner. And increasingly they are requiring more money and closer business relationships in order to successfully develop on their platforms.

      Linux on the desktop is here. It is better in many ways than Windows and it costs much less. Isn't the writing on the wall?

  10. Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 4, Interesting
    You come talk to me when you've read something about the sad, sad debacle that was Half Life for Mac. 99% ported after months of delay and sandbagging, then.. blammo, Cancelled, never to be seen again.

    I swear it was like watching your dog get hit by a car as he returned from the pound.

    --
    If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
    1. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 2, Funny

      it was like watching your dog get hit by a car as he returned from the pound.

      Wow. That brought back some bad memories.

    2. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by telstar · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      "I swear it was like watching your dog get hit by a car as he returned from the pound."
      • What was your dog doing in the pound?

    3. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Talez · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      What was your dog doing in the pound?

      Ranger Sierra locked him up because he kept pissing on everyone's front lawn.

    4. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by johnjuanny · · Score: 1

      Tell me about it. With that game on the Mac, every game I ever play would have been readily available.. instead I need to keep my PC around for games. Most of the good FPS online games are Half-Life mods, in one fell swoop the Mac would have loads of games, I could even bring mine to a LAN party.. I'd be investing in a G5 right now if Half-Life 2 was coming out for the Mac!

      It's so frustrating, it surely would have been worth their while to release the Mac port later, when they realised Half-Life wasn't going away thanks to the huge mod community.

    5. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bah.

      take it to macslash.

    6. Re: Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 0, Offtopic


      > > I swear it was like watching your dog get hit by a car as he returned from the pound.

      > What was your dog doing in the pound?

      Getting his ashes hauled, if he was lucky.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    7. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by zaffir · · Score: 1

      I believe the guy doing the port still has a copy, but hasn't leaked it. And nobody has managed to get ahold of any copies Valve has. This is also the case for Half-Life on the Dreamcast. It was 100% done. There were strategy guides in the stores. Sierra decided to pull it. Thankfully someone released it to the DC community, but still - there might have been more life in the DC had it shipped to the stores.

      --
      "Upon attaching the waterblock to my penis, I began to notice that I know nothing about computers." -- JRockway
    8. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Yaztromo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Reminds me of the Doom for OS/2 debacle back in the early-mid 90s. IBM contracted a developer to port Doom to OS/2. IBM demoed the game in action at some trade shows. A private beta version was eventually leaked to the Internet, but the finished game never saw the light of day.

      Similar situation happened with Lemmings for OS/2. A developer was contracted by Sony/Psygnosis to do the port. The developer became active on comp.os.os2.games recruiting beta testers. Public betas were made available. The game worked perfectly with the 5 or 6 demo levels that were in the beta, and then suddenly everything disappeared.

      I sometimes think that Linux users have forgotten that, for many of us, this sort of situation isn't new. I swore off Windows completely back in 1993, and saw this same sort of thing over, and over, and over, and over again. I'm seeing the same thing now with Linux (and, as you point out, it's often been an issue for Mac users as well).

      I wish I had a solution (I wish I had a solution 8 years ago for that matter). I don't like the situation anymore than anyone else here does, but, as they say, it is what it is.

      Yaz.

    9. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by mabhatter654 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The key for linux gaming is to use something like Knoppix! That way you bypass all the normal Linux troubleshooting issues and get straight to playing. This would turn the PC into a giant console! Granted, you would have to create a really clean API for forward and backward disc compatibility and store part of the drivers/swap files on a HDD for speed and future hardware/patches, but it could work quite nicely. With all the viruses and worms affecting hi-speed users, and PS2/Xbox going online, everyone should have basic network connections to the net thru hardware routers/firewalls real-soon-now.

    10. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of the Doom for OS/2 debacle back in the early-mid 90s. IBM contracted a developer to port Doom to OS/2. IBM demoed the game in action at some trade shows. A private beta version was eventually leaked to the Internet, but the finished game never saw the light of day

      ... which reminds me of the old line:
      Nobody writes games for OS/2 - nobody writes *anything* for OS/2

    11. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my weiner is bigger than yours, and i use windows

    12. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Nermal6693 · · Score: 1

      For those of you who don't know, there's a petition to bring HL2 to the Mac here.

    13. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      Id have a habit of open-sourcing their game code just before they release new versions. I wonder if Valve might be persuaded to do the same with Half-Life. I'm really not that fussed about HL2, but it would be nice to have the change to port the original to the Mac. The graphics code has an OpenGL rendering path, and the networking uses TCP/IP, so the only things that would need porting are the sound code and the non-3d graphics code. Oh, and fixing endian issues in the data structures.

      Actually, i'm a little surprised that game publishers don't release their code with a `you can only use this for porting' license. If enough people want a game on a different platform, then they can port it themselves, at no cost to the publisher. If a port is particularly popular, then the publisher can keep this in mind when releasing their next title.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    14. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Mathetes · · Score: 5, Informative

      You mean something like this?

      http://www.gentoogames.com/

    15. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Yakman · · Score: 1

      I would say Valve are not allowed to release the code for the HL engine since it's based on a licensed copy of the Quake I engine (with some Quake II functionality added in when Id released Q2 to licensees). Feel free to download the Quake I and Quake II source and write your own Half Life engine :)

    16. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Darren+Winsper · · Score: 1

      And what happens when your new graphics card isn't supported by the drivers on the game CD?

    17. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thing is... I hate the console way of doing things.

      I often leave lots of stuff idling in the background when I game. I don't want to have to reboot my damn machine just because I fancy a quick game of something.

      This doesn't matter with a "real" console, since it's a dedicated system anyway.

      With a PC, it sucks.

    18. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh.

      While that is true, it's a *MASSIVELY* modified Quake I engine.

      They more or less rewrote everything by the time HL appeared.

      It's got some really nice stuff in there that Q2 lacks, such as skeletal animation - I don't think even Q3 had that, come to think of it... but I digress.

      I'm sure it's possible - people have written engines for all sorts of games based on reverse-engineering the data, after all - but it'd be bloody hard.

      Plus, you might as well use Tenebrae as a starting point... :)

    19. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Obiwan+Kenobi · · Score: 1

      This would turn the PC into a giant console!

      You mean like the X-Box? And speaking of giant, have you felt the heft on that thing? It's huge! Weighs like 20 pounds...

    20. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by molarmass192 · · Score: 1

      Agreed, most people don't want to reboot to play a game, myself included. The only viable solution is a cross platform gaming API that caters to DirectX developers. I've read of hints of a possible Java gaming API from Sun, beyond the J2ME one, but the obstacles to overcome in creating a cross platform toolkit are significant. One thing's for sure, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for MS to port DX to Linux and Mac.

      Now, I'm a 100% Linux user but I understand if companies choose not to port to my platform, I simply don't buy those games even if I really want them, see C&C Generals. However, when a company does port to my platform, I ALWAYS buy a copy, even if I think the game is boring, UT2003 anyone? If Linux users want more Linux games, we need to speak with our hearts and wallets.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    21. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the whole live CD thing was so balls-rad-fantastic I burned I bunch and tried them on as many machines as I could. I also gave them out to anyone who would take them. The CDs work well overall, but I often encountered one of these problems:

      1) Hardware support: No Nvidia? No game for you. Come back one year.

      2) Performance: CD-ROM drives are slow. No problem if you have enough RAM to cache the entire disc, but most machines don't nowadays.

      3) X Configuration: Even if you only target Nvidia, as most of the live CDs do, it doesn't always work out of the box. This requires Advanced Linux Tweakage which would turn off casual gamers.

    22. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

      It was the Quake I port that was leaked, not doom. And the OS/2 version kicked the shit out of the windows version, loading in only a second or two.

    23. Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. by Yaztromo · · Score: 1
      It was the Quake I port that was leaked, not doom. And the OS/2 version kicked the shit out of the windows version, loading in only a second or two.

      Sorry, but you're quite incorrect -- I have the leaked Doom for OS/2 client sitting here in front of me, complete with all the copyright statements to back up my story.

      There was a version of Quake 1 that was released for OS/2, but that was compiled by some OS/2 users based off Quake source code that was accidentially leaked to the web. It was never an official product or project of anyone, but was instead the product of some hackers taking advantage of a situation.

      I do agree however -- it did play better on OS/2 than it did anywhere else, for its time.

      Yaz.

  11. Blind! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With a website background colour such as the one he's chosen, I doubt any of his readers will be able to see well enough to play a game. The colour and font size he's chosen leave my eyes seeing a pattern on everything.

    1. Re:Blind! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I feel the same way about ars technica. Fortunately, Opera has a `user mode / author mode' toggle button, which lets me replace the text / background colour etc. with something sane at the touch of a button.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  12. What about us Netware users? by Chairboy · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm running netware, that means I can't even play tuxracer! Why oh why won't Valve give me a netware port?

    One other thing, I have this Amiga....

    1. Re:What about us Netware users? by LucidityZero · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Moded up as funny, but actually in a strange way insightful...

      You run Linux. I run Linux. For the added beauty of this operating system, we have to make compromises. Right now, that is software (specifically game) support.

      The answer is simply to continue to run Linux and continue to show others how wonderful this OS is.

      We need numbers before companies will port all of their games to Linux. I can't blame them in the least, if I was the CEO of a gaming company, I wouldn't waste my time and effort porting something to Linux.

      Unfortunately, the answer is not "MAKE THEM PORT GAMES SO MORE USERS WILL COME!!!??!?!"

      The answer is, get more users. Once Linux has a significant share of the desktop community, the games will follow suit.


      --
      Sig.i>
    2. Re:What about us Netware users? by gid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The answer is, get more users. Once Linux has a significant share of the desktop community, the games will follow suit.

      And herein lies the chicken and the egg problem. Most people won't run Linux as their primary OS unless it does everything they want, including games. I run Linux, ya, but I have another machine with Windows XP on it that I fire up for gaming, and other windows stuff I can't do in Linux.

      Most people can't afford two high quality machines, and dual booting is a pain in the ass, oh shit, that file's on my Linux partition, I gotta reboot to get to it. Crap, I need to send an email to my Aunt, gotta reboot to Windows. I did dual boot for years, the result was that I never booted to Linux because Windows could do most that Linux could do, and more, without constantly rebooting.

      Sure there's WineX, etc for transgaming blah blah blah, but that's never gonna play HL2 as soon as it hits the shelves. So the games, or at least some games are going to have to be there to get people to switch. And you're going to get people like me to put up with Linux and it's lack of games just because it's something I believe in. The more people switch, the more games there will be, etc. It's gonna be a long and grueling process.

      As for showing people how great Linux is, one glance at a nasty config file they have to edit to get X working, recompiling the kernel for sound, etc, and they go screaming the other way. :)

    3. Re:What about us Netware users? by LucidityZero · · Score: 1

      I agree with this entirely. As far as I can tell, it only adds to my post.

      In the mean time, little things are happening, like my mom switched to Linux. She was sick one day, called me at work, asked me if I had "freecell" on my laptop. I had a default install of RedHat, and I did. Gave her an account to login remotely, and she sat in bed playing freecell. Even just playing freecell, she was so much impressed with how clean everything was, how she didn't have to deal with stupid pop ups, or wait for half an hour while Windows (and it's spy-ware transients) loaded, I was able to convince her to switch.

      She needs: email, web browsing and word processing. And that part we have down pat.

      --
      Sig.i>
    4. Re:What about us Netware users? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Ah but you see this is valve, not say a company like bioware. The difference is that valve has made great use of Linux for their game. Namely as a the server for multiplayer. My ISP xs4all.nl runs several games. All on linux, they refuse to touch windows games servers for obvious reasons.

      So valve is familiar with how to write code for linux and they use it to make money. Bioware didn't but they did support linux, sure it took them time but they did it. Thanks.

      So is it really that stupid to expect a company like Valve to give something back for all those linux machines that have helped make their game great?

      Remember that the the cost of the engine, the bit that would need porting, is minor nowadays to the cost of creating the world, the art, wich doesn't need to be ported.

      So the real problem the poster has is not that valve like the fast majority of game companies ignores linux. They made gratefull use of linux by running their game servers on it. Is it then really that odd to expect that they would this time also allow all those linux users who helped made their game great to be able to play it as well? It is not like the cost of porting is all that big. They know how to write for linux and considering it comes out on x-box they know how to port.

      --

      MMO Quests are like orgasms:

      You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    5. Re:What about us Netware users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everybody thinks "Linux" is slick. I have tried alot ranging from Red Hat, Mandrake to Knoppix and distro-on-a-floppy. My favourite WM would be KDE, but the programs are just too buggy. They always crash left and right around me. With the bomb-icons, I feel like I'm in a war or something. This is like Windows programs was 4-5 years ago, now it hardly crashes (except for hardware freezes, which you cannot blame the OS for).

      Not to mention the horrible hacked GUI that is obviously manually hacked, with text that doesn't fit the dialog boxes etc. A stupid thing to copy from commercial OSes. Why not let the computer handle resizing of dialog boxes and setup of controls automatically?

      So I use Windows as my primary OS, and try out new distros now and then to see if things have improved. But to tell the truth, I find Windows much less PITA to operate and use for daily desktop use. There once was a time when I thought it was fun to use days to figure out how to do something. Those days are gone, and my patience is limited. I don't want to sit in front of the computer swearing (which is why I try to avoid Windows-installs too ;-).

      I think the distro-makers should concentrate to put together more robust packages, and not rely upon patching up beta-quality software afterwards. Give me a rock-solid OS from top to bottom, ah, and with games of course ;-)

    6. Re:What about us Netware users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One other thing, I have this Amiga....

      Great, grab a copy af Gloom and have fun shooting things.

    7. Re:What about us Netware users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "So is it really that stupid to expect a company like Valve to give something back for all those linux machines that have helped make their game great?"

      Yes.

      Why should they "give back"?
      The Linux server was demanded by ISPs.

      Valve responded to a customer demand in effect.

      Now, you want Valve to "give back" for doing something their customers demanded in the first place?

      " Is it then really that odd to expect that they would this time also allow all those linux users who helped made their game great to be able to play it as well? "

      All those "linux users" did squat. The certainly didn't help make the "game great".

      Valve and Gooseman did that.

      "...and considering it comes out on x-box they know how to port."

      The Xbox is a PC. It even runs DirectX.

      Porting is trivial.

      To port to Linux, they'd have to write an entirely new renderer in OpenGL, and one that supports two distinct sets of "extensions", since OpenGL 1.3 can't support pixel shaders etc. that HL2 makes such heavy use of without the proprietary GL extensions by nVidia and ATI.

      It's a lot of work, and I'm sure Valve has plenty of work to be getting on with right now, such as getting HL2 out the door, then getting the first HL2 patch out the door.

    8. Re:What about us Netware users? by Ice_Balrog · · Score: 1

      What amazes me is that you are actually still running a HL server.

      If it was me, I would have shut it down the moment Valve declared that it wasn't gonna make a HL2 Linux Client.

      --
      #include "sig.h"
  13. unfortunatly... by felesii · · Score: 1

    most gamers don't want to sit around and configure a linux system for gaming, nor do they even know how, and windows is pretty idiot proof in that respect.. (at least as far as the idiots are concerned)

    1. Re:unfortunatly... by bertnewton · · Score: 1

      and windows is pretty idiot proof in that respect..

      Make something idiot proof and they'll make a better idiot.

    2. Re: unfortunatly... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > most gamers don't want to sit around and configure a linux system for gaming, nor do they even know how

      My last few Linux installs/upgrades have done a darn good job at detecting hardware, so if licensing issues don't get in the way it might be possible to use Linux as a gaming platform and put the game on bootable Linux media for non-Linuxers to use when they want to play. A sort of reversed dual-boot solution.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re: unfortunatly... by Stevyn · · Score: 1

      Put in on a bootable linux users? They'd spend way too much time making sure everyone's hardware would work. And most Windows users, who consist of 99% of their market share, wouldn't like it either because of having to reboot and wait for linux to find and configure their hardware everytime they play the game. They have to commit time to develop a game for many platforms. If only 1% of the buyers use a platform other than windows then it's worth it to them to not care about linux games and let some other company deal with it now.

    4. Re:unfortunatly... by moncyb · · Score: 1

      Ummm...configuring Linux more difficult than Windows? I'm not so sure about that. That hasn't been my experience. My "computer expert" roommates couldn't install Windows to save their lives. More likely Windows is "easier to configure" because most people buy their computers with Windows preinstalled. If people bought Linux preinstalled and ready to go, they'd probably start saying Linux is "easy to configure" too. At least with Linux the configuration won't change on its own...unless you have a really insane distro like Red Hat.

    5. Re:unfortunatly... by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      I've never had to dig into my X11Config file on Windows to get my video drivers working.

      Yes, I am aware there isn't an X11Config on Windows. That's not the point. To install Linux video drivers I had to go in and manually edit what would be a very scary looking file for the overwhelming majority of users, then on top of that I couldn't get X to start up. After some posting on the nVidia troubleshooting forum I found that I needed to enable IgnoreEDID and I still have no clue WTF that does. It took me the better part of two weeks to INSTALL MY DAMN VIDEO DRIVERS because I couldn't get any help with my problem.

      And anyone that can't install Windows is a total dumbass. It's more idiot proof than a freaking Red Hat install! Even my dad can install Windows.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    6. Re:unfortunatly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you know what the reaction of Linux users will be to your story? They'll call you a dumbass. A luser. Just not brainy enough to join their exalted ranks. It's when you meet a Linux user face to face that this idea really becomes laughable. It's just that they have nothing better to do with their lives. They wouldn't be "penguin lovers" if any women were available.

      That's why most of the world can't be bothered with Linux.

    7. Re:unfortunatly... by moncyb · · Score: 1

      First off, there are GUI config tools for XFree86. You didn't even say what distro you used, so for all I know, you chose one which requires a manual editing of all config files or is completely brain dead.

      Second, I've never heard of an IgnoreEDID option. It is probably a nVidia specific thing. Sometimes card manufacturers require you to change some settings which are specific to your driver. It goes that way for Windows too. Editing a registry key (the exact equivalent of this) is just as difficult as editing a text file. Part of the problem is nVidia doesn't have much experience making drivers for Linux.

      Go back a few years ago, and you had the same problem with 3D video cards in Windows. People had to mess with the registry or try installing the latest driver and sometimes they never got it working properly. Once nVidia works out all the kinks, you probably won't have to tweak config options. I don't have a nVidia card, though I have heard the open source drivers work fine, but they don't have all the features--nVidia won't release the specs. You'd have the same problems with making an open source driver for Windows too. Doing a google search, the IgnoreEDID option sounds like it's required because of a bug in the nVidia driver.

      I have an ATI TV card, and when I tried it in Windows, with the manufacturer's supplied drivers no less, but the computer would keep rebooting every time I tried to use it, yet it works fine with the open source drivers in Linux. I guess by your logic, no TV cards will ever work in Windows.

      Lastly, who said Red Hat has the most "idiot proof" install??? I didn't. My friend lost his network card drivers because he thought the "easy" (or whatever they call it) install option wouldn't wipe out his second hard drive. He didn't have a floppy for that machine (and the drivers were on a floppy), so it was a pain in the ass to get the drivers back on that system. He isn't exactly an idiot, then again, he is a Windows programmer.

      Your dad must know much more about computers than most people. None of my roommates could install Windows to save their lives, nor could my parents. In fact, the only person I know besides myself who can install Windows by himself is the programming friend mentioned above, and he likes to buy computers with Windows pre-installed because it's easier. Your dad certainly sounds like an exception to me. Let me guess, he either has an engineering degree or has been using computers for a few decades. Try finding some people who have never used computers before or have only used computers for simple things like word processing--people who have never tried to install anything, and try to get them to install Windows by themselves. I doubt they will be able to do it, especially if the drivers aren't on the Windows install disk.

    8. Re:unfortunatly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      None of my roommates could install Windows to save their lives, nor could my parents.

      So you were born and raised in the sheltered workshop, and you won't be leaving any time soon?

    9. Re:unfortunatly... by moncyb · · Score: 1

      Whatever you fucking idiot. Not everyone is a computer expert, and if they can't install a poorly designed piece of shit, it doesn't mean they are disabled. Just because you are a shitheaded geek wannabe and all your dickhead friends are the same doesn't mean normal people are. Why don't you go back to you inbred parent's basement in fucking hell where you came from you shit-munching pig-fucking dolphin.

    10. Re:unfortunatly... by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      IgnoreEDID is something to keep the nVidia drivers from trying to detect something that doesn't allow X to start. I'm not too sure about the specifics, and I don't care to find out. It's not a bug in the driver, it's something to do with my monitor being shite.

      If your computer is rebooting because of your vidcard drivers, I daresay you have a conflict somewhere. Mine did the same thing after I upgraded to XP a while back (before I switched to Linux). I ended up having to completely wipe out all sound and video drivers and have XP automatically detect everything again, then install all the updated drivers. Total PITA.

      In my experience, Red Hat DOES have the most idiot proof install, if you want it to. Your friend wanted the easy install to act like a custom install. He should have known better. He should also have had his network card drivers handy on a CD if he knew that the Red Hat CD didn't have them. I keep all the software I know I'll need after a reinstall on a CD (nVidia drivers, java, a couple of programs I like, etc.) and your friend would be well advised to do the same.

      Your dad certainly sounds like an exception to me. Let me guess, he either has an engineering degree or has been using computers for a few decades.

      Actually, my dad is an auto mechanic. While some of the equipment they use nowdays would snap in half the brains of most computer users, it's not exactly an MCSE equivalent, is it? Then again, he does have the ability to RTFM and figure out problems on his own.

      Try finding some people who have never used computers before or have only used computers for simple things like word processing--people who have never tried to install anything, and try to get them to install Windows by themselves.

      And what will that prove? That's like saying I can't drive a car on the highway because I couldn't beat Michael Schumacher in an F1 race. All it proves is that a newbie can't do something technically complicated. My dad being able to install Windows doesn't surprise me, he isn't a computer guy. A computer guy being unable to install Windows consistently... that's just stupid.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    11. Re:unfortunatly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just incomprehensible - there's nothing TO DO when you install windows. Accept the defaults and it installs itself! You CAN enter a CD key when asked can't you?

      Windows is designed for the average american. Admitting you're below average is pretty damn sad - no need to get angry, I'm honestly showing some sympathy here. Never been called a dolphin before, ROFL!

    12. Re:unfortunatly... by moncyb · · Score: 1

      You are full of shit and you know it. That's why you are posting as an anonymous coward. Windows isn't designed for the "average american" it's designed for the fuckihng idiots who are too stupid to know when they're getting screwed. Installing Windows isn't that easy unless everything happens to go right, and Microsoft programmers are such fucking incompetent idiots that things usually go wrong. If you ever stop fucking your sister and step out of your parent's basement, you'd see it.

  14. A reflection of the state of Linux in general by Kalewa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Linux has a strong hold in the server market, but not so much with clients. It would seem be holding true here too, but not for the same reasons.

  15. Continue playing... by The+Revolutionary · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...nethack?

    How do you think I should react? I mean, I could switch to Slash'Em, but don't you think that's a bit extreme?

    1. Re:Continue playing... by Greyfox · · Score: 1
      Or xtrek. There isn't even a client installer in Debian, much less a server, and that was always one of the more enjoyable freely-developed games you could play.

      I don't think the Open Source community is ready to take on a modern game development, which requires as many artists and other supporting staff as it does programmers, but if we focus on creating simple and fun-to-play games there's no reason we couldn't build up a decent selection (As, indeed, we have.)

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  16. Boot Windows by toupsie · · Score: 5, Funny

    It won't kill you. Just think of it as a Wintendo.

    --
    Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    1. Re:Boot Windows by CaptnMArk · · Score: 1

      That's funny.

      I tried playing Half Life by booting into windows, but just couldn't bother to finish it (rebooting wasn't worth it).

      It wasn't until I installed it under Wine that I managed to finish the game.

      Based on this, I am not going to buy Half life 2.

    2. Re:Boot Windows by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      Most expensive game console on the market. The graphics card costs more than an XBox, and the full system more than an XBox, PlayStation2 and GameCube combined.

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    3. Re:Boot Windows by Baloo+Ursidae · · Score: 1

      But some of us don't own Windows, aren't inspired to pirate it, aren't willing to part with that much money for so little product, and don't want to lose their uptime. Honestly, why should I pay $600 to play a $30 game?

      --
      Help us build a better map!
    4. Re:Boot Windows by kauschovar · · Score: 1

      where the hell do you buy Windows from that costs you $600?!

    5. Re:Boot Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A console that crashes as often as Windows would never see any serious sales.

    6. Re:Boot Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not afraid of being killed by windoze, but the last time I made a major hardware-upgrade, _I_ killed it (it threw out the old SCSI-driver but didn't install a new one...). Linux didn't care :)

    7. Re:Boot Windows by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      Don't play the game. Period.

      Your uptime is more important than playing this game so it appears that it isn't for you.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    8. Re:Boot Windows by EpsCylonB · · Score: 1

      Your uptime is more important than playing this game so it appears that it isn't for you.

      I think that is the most insightful thing I have read today. On the one hand we have a handful of linux gamers moaning about the lack of a port and on the other we have lots of linux users who really aren't interested enough in games to even consider booting windows.

      There is no market here, why should valve port when they won't make any money ?.

    9. Re:Boot Windows by kabocox · · Score: 1

      Please, don't insult Nintendo like that!

    10. Re:Boot Windows by Baloo+Ursidae · · Score: 1

      Easy. I don't.

      --
      Help us build a better map!
    11. Re:Boot Windows by Baloo+Ursidae · · Score: 1

      I'd buy the game if there was Linux binaries. End of story.

      --
      Help us build a better map!
  17. Voodoo3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Do you think that Halflife 2 will run on my Linux box? P166/64M RAM, voodoo3 PCI... :( seems like it's time to upgrade... just waiting for the next paycheque... have been, it seems, for quite some time *G*

    The 5P1D3R...
    fp?

    1. Re:Voodoo3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      fp?

      YOU FAIL IT!

  18. Let me get my wallhack... by Trent_Alkaline · · Score: 5, Funny

    and I'll look into valve studios and find out for you.

    1. Re:Let me get my wallhack... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [[Trent_Alkaline approaches the core of Valve studios. At last he comes to the center of the building, a totally walled-off room with goat skulls mounted on each side]]

      [Trent_Alkaline] At last! I am here! Soon I will learn the secret of Half-Life 2's development process, and the fate of linux gamers!

      [[Trent_Alkaline noclips through that last wall..]]

      [Trent_Alkaline] WTF, it's John Romero's head on a stick????

  19. Dear Valve, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I will pay $5 more for the linux version of HL2, in order to show my support for a company that supports linux. Just like I sometimes pay for the boxed versions of RedHat (and SuSE at work) even though I can download the distributions form the net for free. I do this to 'vote' for these companies with my $$$. Thank you.

    1. Re:Dear Valve, by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Would you pay $5 before the port was done? If so, write to Valve, and ask them how much a Linux port would cost to do. Then start a fund to finance it. If enough people are willing to pay the $5 in advance to cover the cost of porting, then Valve can do it at no cost to themselves. I can't see any corporation turning down a chance to increase their potential product market at no risk and no cost.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  20. Here we go... by Talez · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ever so often someone bring up the Linux as a game platform argument.

    Yes its technically capable. Especially with modern nVidia drivers the way they are. But that's not the point.

    The point is that you have to expend money, resources and time to make a Linux client. Why are you going to do that when 95% of your user base can/will use the Windows version anyway?

    Besides community goodwill, there is no good reason for a developer to port a game to Linux and until there is a damn good reason for developers to port games to Linux, UT2K3 will remain the exception rather than the rule.

    1. Re:Here we go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they'll port to linux, when Microsoft finally clamps down on Devil's Own users.

      you have no idea how many gamers i know

      and how many of them know FCKGW...

      so microsoft clamps down. then a whole shit load of people have to shell out $300 for their operating system.

      run games on linux, and you don't even have to INSTALL!!! just use something like morphix as a base, THEN BOOT DIRECTLY INTO THE GAME.

      you see, the fall out of FCKGW has not hit yet.
      contrary to popular belief.

    2. Re:Here we go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Lets assume we write a portable version of code instead of a Windows tied version. Mac OS X (and by extension Linux which is *nix like) is then a very obvious targets. So, original development costs possibly go up a bit. Then, work is done to tune the port it onto multiple platforms. You use OpenGL, have to write a different core sound driver for each platform you target, different installers, maybe a few other tweaks, and that's it. Now, this only brings in a possible 5% of the market place, like you stated. But 5% of 300 million is 1.5 million. If 1% of that market buys the game, you've got 150,000 more customers. You've also got a very portable game which minus the graphics engine should work on an xbox (yet another market). You've also got very little rewrite. Now, it might make sense for a one time shot company who doesn't have the resources to write for multiple platforms, but for even remotely large projects now days there's no reason to use anything but mostly portable C or C++. It's not like you need to write anything in assembly which was the old excuse. Or is 150,000*$30 (aka $4.5 million) not worth the upfront extra work to write portable code in the first place?

    3. Re:Here we go... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Mod this guy up. 100% correct. THe profitability is increased further when you consider licensing the engine to other developers.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    4. Re:Here we go... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      FCKGW? What's that?

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    5. Re:Here we go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first 4 letters in a widely used windowsxp serial number...

    6. Re:Here we go... by DrPascal · · Score: 1

      so microsoft clamps down. then a whole shit load of people have to shell out $300 for their operating system.

      Umm, no.

      People took a key generator, found one that was compatible with the XP Install CD, and then put Service Pack 1 on top. Do you really think that those using the Devil's Own key gave up that quick? Get a clue.

      --
      DrPascal: Not the language, the mathematician.
    7. Re:Here we go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1% of 1,500,000 is 15,000, right? Aka $450,000? Pretty generous with those funny-shaped letters.

    8. Re:Here we go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fifth letter is there too, just in case you wanted it.

    9. Re:Here we go... by Kris_J · · Score: 1

      1% of 1.5 million is 15,000. Sales of US$450,000, which probably only results in profit of US$45,000, won't even pay for the training of your first tier telephone support to cope with problems on the Linux platform.

    10. Re:Here we go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better still - get the newer Enterprise XP CD with SP1 already on it.

      38BXC-F2C4R-xxxxx-DBQXM-3C7V6

    11. Re:Here we go... by shirai · · Score: 1

      "If 1% of the market buys the game..."

      Sounds like Amway or business plans that say if only 0.001% of China buys your product...

      --
      Sunny

      Be my Friend

    12. Re:Here we go... by WasterDave · · Score: 1

      You use OpenGL, have to write a different core sound driver for each platform you target, different installers, maybe a few other tweaks, and that's it. Now, this only brings in a possible 5% of the market place, like you stated

      More to the point it's a market place that isn't sitting at home playing HL2 because they can't.

      But I think that's not the point. I imagine by asking Billyware politely you can get a big chunk of your development costs upfront in return for not using OpenGL. If anything they're more interested in locking out the PS2 than anything else.

      Dave

      --
      I write a blog now, you should be afraid.
    13. Re:Here we go... by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      Lets assume we write a portable version of code instead of a Windows tied version.

      The backends are nearly always portable -- that's what you need for a server after all, and it's in your interest to port that to as many platforms as possible (especially whatever platforms are popular in a hosted services environment).

      You use OpenGL, have to write a different core sound driver for each platform you target, different installers, maybe a few other tweaks, and that's it.

      That's it? Nice way of tossing that off there like it doesn't matter.

      Having to write different sound engines is the worst bit... what a freaking nightmare for both development and QA (which, BTW, you completely forgot -- you must QA everything 3x as much because you now have 3 target platforms -- assuming that just because something works on one platform is going to guarantee you bugs on the non-tested platforms). Using OpenGL isn't the magic drop in replacement for DirectX that some seem to think it is. Yes, all the functionality is there. But DirectX has cleaned up a lot since the pre DX5 days, and more since then. Both APIs are hopelessly convoluted still, but at least with DirectX you have a huge freaking support infrastructure. Talk shit about MS all you want (and I do, frequently), but their developer support is superb.

      But 5% of 300 million is 1.5 million. If 1% of that market buys the game, you've got 150,000 more customers.

      Ignoring the really bad math on your part, you've also ignored the minor fact that most of that 1.5M are not in a position to be buying the game. Macs used for business purposes aren't likely to be buying games. Nor are Linux boxes used as servers. So cut that 1.5M by half and then take out your 1% -- which is still a gross overestimation.

      You've also got a very portable game which minus the graphics engine should work on an xbox

      Yes, and my car could compete in NASCAR if I merely replaced the engine, struts, and transmission.

      If you're looking at the Xbox to port, then you're better off with DirectX -- you'll have to go there anyway for Xbox and it works just fine on Windows PCs. Who do you think the bigger market is? Xbox or Linux/Mac? I'm ignoring PS2 and Gamecube because you're going to have to rewrite massive portions of the code to go to either one from PC, so they're a major undertaking from either point of view.

      It's not like you need to write anything in assembly which was the old excuse.

      I'm glad you know more about this than John Carmack. I don't know about D3, but previous engines have always had hand tuned assembly in core routines.

      Or is 150,000*$30 (aka $4.5 million) not worth the upfront extra work to write portable code in the first place?

      Your math is wrong (see above or other posters) and so is your business sense. You haven't accounted for QA or support, both of which are going to be very expensive. No, it's not worth the extra work. I respect that some companies are willing to do the work anyway, but they've also yet to show a profit for doing so -- but they're making enough money to be willing to sacrifice some profit to do this. Don't try and paint it any other way.

  21. Too lazy to finish my karma whore post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Blah Blah something about DRM blah Steam is some form of DRM, or something, Steam is part of Half-Life 2, shallow summary of linux community, sudden appearance of the baseless assumption using Half-Life 2 would be some kind of acceptance by the linux community of DRM. Innuendo? Strange assertion that hacking Steam would somehow be easier in linux than windows becuase linux has an open-source kernel, totally hypothetical question as to whether or not whoever it is that makes Half-Life 2 would allow Steam on linux or whoever it is that makes linux would allow Steam on linux, inexplicable reference of DMCA, betrayal of the fact that I know very little about economics, witty but meaningless remark.

    [Think of creative Sig to put here before submitting]

    1. Re:Too lazy to finish my karma whore post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to be an editor.

    2. Re:Too lazy to finish my karma whore post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good stuff :)

    3. Re:Too lazy to finish my karma whore post by phliver · · Score: 1

      Acually steam does run on linux. Its not very prominent on steampowered but there is an emerge for it with gentoo. It really just installs the halflife server for linux.

  22. We just write our own! by ticklejw · · Score: 1

    It took them a long time to get Half-Life 2 right (er, it continues to take them a long time.) Imagine how much faster, though, if an open-source gaming engine were started? sure, it wouldn't have the Half-Life storyline, but who cares? If you play an FPS for the story, you have problems.

    --
    "Software is like sex; it's better when it's free." -Linus Torvalds
    1. Re:We just write our own! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My god I truly hope that parent isn't a troll, which would mean that he seriously believes in what he wrote. Thank you, you made my day.

    2. Re:We just write our own! by Babbster · · Score: 2, Funny
      If you play an FPS for the story, you have problems.

      According to Joe Lieberman (and obviously others), if you play an FPS for the killing virtual people you have much bigger problems.

    3. Re:We just write our own! by Osty · · Score: 1

      It took them a long time to get Half-Life 2 right (er, it continues to take them a long time.) Imagine how much faster, though, if an open-source gaming engine were started? sure, it wouldn't have the Half-Life storyline, but who cares? If you play an FPS for the story, you have problems.

      You do realize that making a game requires more than just writing an engine, right? If that were all it takes, then there would be tons of games for Linux, because there are a number of open source 3D engines. Consider that professional games take more than a year to produce these days, even when using an existing engine (see all of the recent Tom Clancy games, or XIII, for example). You need art talent, writing talent, scripters, modelers, level designers, and more. Gone are the days when a programmer or two can write a quality game in a matter of months in their parents' basements or garages. Well, it can be done (see Derek Smart and his Battlecruiser games), but it takes a huge investment in time, and usually a huge investment in money as well if you want to compete with professional games.

    4. Re:We just write our own! by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      There are many open source game engines. They often fail and die off because there is a lack of money involved and thus people become disinterested in working on projects, much before they become complete.

      Not all of them tho... But most that do work out, go commercial because people will pay money.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    5. Re:We just write our own! by moncyb · · Score: 1

      Like TrancePhreak said, there are various engines and whatnot. Crystal Space. ExNihilo. Graphics3D (well just a library). Irrlicht. OGRE. Probably many more. I haven't really tried them out much, so I don't know how well they work. I know Crystal Space has been around a while and seems popular, so it is probably somewhat mature. If you really want an open source game engine, just look around and help out.

  23. I won't be buying it by MrResistor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I finally said goodby to Windows almost a year ago, and I won't be going back for a mere game, no matter how good it is. If they won't support me, I won't support them.

    If they do decide to port it, though, I will gladly give them some of my money. Sadly, I don't see that happening. I guess I'll just have to give it to id and Epic instead.

    --
    Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    1. Re:I won't be buying it by Babbster · · Score: 1
      I guess I'll just have to give it to id and Epic instead.

      Not so fast...

    2. Re:I won't be buying it by windsok · · Score: 1

      Same situation here, ive made the switch to linux, and there is no way im going to install windows just to play some games. I enjoy many games on my linux system, Fuhquake (http://www.fuhquake.net) Quake3, Enemy Teritory, etc, etc. all hail iD Software, they care about us linux users :)... Bring on DooM3!

    3. Re:I won't be buying it by Kenja · · Score: 1

      The bastards also wont be porting it to my Atari ST. I purchased one computer for games and I refuse to get another. They must not want my money if they wont supprot my hardware.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    4. Re:I won't be buying it by Charnock · · Score: 1

      It is a matter of priorities. If you are a gamer you will follow the games. If you are a linux-zealot then you follow the OS. I for one am a gamer. I would follow a great game anywhere (i even bought a gamecube and i hate that thing...but i wanted to play smash brothers).

    5. Re:I won't be buying it by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      That's true, it is a matter of priorities. I didn't switch to Linux because I'm a zealot, I switched because I have better things to do with my time than fix Windows problems. The switch has actually given me more time to play games, and to be perfectly honest I'm pretty satisfied with the games that are available to me right now. I'd be interested in a good new game, but IMO no game is worth the additional $200 for Windows plus the hours of patch/reboot/repeat involved in getting Windows installed and running properly. That's aggravating enough when I'm getting paid to deal with it, I'm certainly not going to put myself through that on my own dime.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  24. Skip it, and do something better with your time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Is that an option?

  25. Linux uses don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    When linux comes out with a directx equivelent then they might write for it ( this is ONE set of API's ) . Not opengl doesn't count, that is only graphics.

    You need sound,graphics,networking,AND graphics card writers writing to those drivers. That is what makes windows such a good gaming platform. Linux needs to consolidate and throw away the 4 graphics libraries and the 3 different sound package and the 60 windowing library packages and get down to one standard that EVERYONE uses. Not a lot of people use one, then debian uses another cause it ain't GPL and linux using a combination of 3 and suse using another cause its written outside the USA.

    Linux needs to stopping getting into a pissing war over who's library is better and I re-wrote this library cause I like it better my way and consolidate.

    Then maybe folks will port apps. If I write a game on linux 7.2 it better damn well work on redhat 11 without needing download 65 new packages and getting updates from the vendor.

    1. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Spinality · · Score: 1

      This is how IBM conquered the last generation, and Microsoft conquered the current one. There's no substitute for cubic inches. One of the good things about the Linux world is that we CAN get into pissing contests. But in the long run it means we can't win on the desktop. We can barely buy tickets to WATCH the fight. We can't even figure out which channel the fight is on.

      --
      -- We all have enough strength to endure the misfortunes of other people. La Rochefoucauld
    2. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Jerk+City+Troll · · Score: 5, Insightful
      When linux comes out with a directx equivelent then they might write for it ( this is ONE set of API's ) . Not opengl doesn't count, that is only graphics.
      You need sound,graphics,networking,AND graphics card writers writing to those drivers. That is what makes windows such a good gaming platform. Linux needs to consolidate and throw away the 4 graphics libraries and the 3 different sound package blah blah blah blah blah...

      Oh darn... wait, you mean something like this? Well, if you don't like that, how about this one? Oh, I see... you forgot to do any research before you made you groundless claim.

      Then maybe folks will port apps. If I write a game on linux 7.2 blah blah blah...

      "Linux 7.2", huh? Thanks for proving my point that you don't know wtf you're talking about. "Interesting" my ass.

    3. Re: Linux uses don't get it. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Insightful


      > When linux comes out with a directx equivelent then they might write for it ( this is ONE set of API's ) . Not opengl doesn't count, that is only graphics.

      > You need sound,graphics,networking,AND graphics card writers writing to those drivers. That is what makes windows such a good gaming platform. Linux needs to consolidate and throw away the 4 graphics libraries and the 3 different sound package and the 60 windowing library packages and get down to one standard that EVERYONE uses.

      Sounds like a recipe for SDL.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      good counterpoint.

      slashdot is starting to fester with the kind that installed mandrake last weekend, and now feel qualified to post.

    5. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If I write a game on linux 7.2 it better damn well work on redhat 11 without needing download 65 new packages and getting updates from the vendor.

      AFAIK, that's not exactly followed by M$ Winpatch...

    6. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have never played a game that didn't run better on OpenGL than DirectX, HL 1 included, which will only do 1600x1200 with OpenGL. I don't know if the new version is any better, but it's a hard argument to make that one shitty API is superior to diverse ones.

    7. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no shit. i installed lindows 3 and a half weeks ago and I'm already sick and tired of these n00bs.

    8. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by ColaMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So, let me get this straight:
      Parent poster complains about the number of differing libraries to develop under and wants ONE set of API's.

      You respond by giving him *two* libraries to use.

      Way to miss the point there, fella ;-)

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    9. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Oh, please. Look how irritable and angry you are. You have a chip on your shoulder.

      SDL is nice, and so are a lot of other freeware graphics/audio libraries, but most every developer will tell you they still don't stand up to the massive suite of DirectX technologies. You've probably never even bothered with a DirectX app or an SDL app. I have done both.

      None are equivalent to the speed and power of DirectX. Hate Microsoft all you want, but that's just something you have to cede at this point in time. Why don't YOU do "research" before spouting off and insulting people for giving their opinions on the poor state of Linux gaming development?

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    10. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then maybe folks will port apps. If I write a game on linux 7.2 blah blah blah...

      "Linux 7.2", huh? Thanks for proving my point that you don't know wtf you're talking about. "Interesting" my ass.


      I think perhaps the use of arbitrary version numbers was creative license rather then factual. Like if I said linux version 2.4.6-01 blah blah blah oh wait...

      --jean val jean

    11. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "Oh darn... wait, you mean something like this SDL? Well, if you don't like that, how about this one ClanLib? Oh, I see... you forgot to do any research before you made you groundless claim."

      See Linux users love to point to both these projects yet that only proves how little these specific Linux users know about Direct X.

      Look at both projects and tell me where they speak of things like "fog table emulation" how about getting down to the metal of graphic and sound hardware and emulation of features not present in that hardware so you can provide an equal platform for gaming? That basically disqualifies "mid level" approaches like ClanLib. There is also nowhere near the graphic/audio driver certification that ensures things work. Hell don't get me started on the tower of bable that the competing/complimentary Linux sound systems are in. ALSA supports one sound card. ARTS (KDE) can handle that but this app (specifically Team Speak for example) has issues if I don't use OSS instead. These problems that Linux has RIGHT NOW are obilderated by having Direct X like setups. Sure you can write yet another sound lib but many would rather put those energies on the rest of the game unless they have to. Before you get in a big hissy fit about this specific example go look at the message boards for the Quake engine games. Ask yourself if the majority of those (problems on the board) happen on Windows then get back to me.

      At the end of the day though it is an issue of
      a) good coding practices and placing a high value on portability under different x86 OS's. (Sorry 64 bit users for now but even this will change see Unreal Ed next edition for a baby step in the right direct although its only Windows apparently.)

      b) getting goodwill from a great community that also has good server potential while supporting a fledgling OS that will likely get better in the future.
      c) a platform

      "Linux 7.2", huh? Thanks for proving my point that you don't know wtf you're talking about. "Interesting" my ass."

      It is sad but with the Red Hat dominance of Linux distros in terms of shear volume of installs AND support well many people developers included do think this way. Most developers and publishers want to support a distro NOT a kernel and a whole wack of other variables. This of course assumes they will support it at all. Yet another reason why PC games in general are behind console titles in sales.
      ---
      As an aside I wonder what will happen if Red Hat loses market share on the home installation front due to their newly introduced lifecycle policy. Some seem to think that others will provide support to eratta but I wonder if regular Linux gamers will buy into that or just jump ship to Mandrake or more likely Gentoo. Here is another thought, will people be content to stand still long enough with their Linux install to be a viable target install?

    12. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      3D Graphics: OpenGL
      3D Sound: OpenAL
      Everything else DirectX can do: SDL

      What's missing?

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    13. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by colinleroy · · Score: 1

      Oh darn... wait, you mean something like [libsdl]? Well, if you don't like that, how about [clanlib]? Oh, I see... you forgot to do any research before you made you groundless claim.

      No please not clanlib. It's not endian clean and works real bad on powerpc.

      --
      blah
    14. Re: Linux uses don't get it. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      Umm, SDL doesn't even have a function for drawing a line on the screen in 2D space (you have to go with OpenGL even for simple 2D vector graphics). Now show me which part of SDL does in-game voice-over-IP for me. Right. Now which part lets me render a video clip (in any format of my choice) full screen in under 10 lines of code.

      SDL is nice, but it is nowhere near DirectX. And yes, I have used both.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    15. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by broeman · · Score: 1

      DirectX can only be used through Wine on Linux (and MacOSX?) ... The discussion about DirectX is quite superficial, since it doesn't have a native port for *nices. LibSDL does a good job, and that is why Loki used it (Read the book "Programming Linux Games"). Programming OpenGL is done in a fly and you can choose from many programming-languages like C, C++, Python, Java. BTW, LibSDL is not freeware, it is Free Software, and it doesn't limit itself to one platform (works on *nix, windows and many more).

      --

      (yes this can be compared with sex)
    16. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey stupid....

      www.libsdl.org

      It's 9,000,000 times easier to use than direct X (hell a 12 year okd kid can write a game with libsdl.)

      only a complete moron would make the statement you did.

      oh wait, I know who you are... you ARE a complete moron.

    17. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by PenguiN42 · · Score: 1

      The POINT is that directx doesn't have a native port for unices. the POINT is also that it, technologically speaking, blows SDL away. So what is the purpose of your post?

      --
      The following sentence is true. The preceding sentence was false.
    18. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Jerk+City+Troll · · Score: 1
      Oh, please. Look how irritable and angry you are. You have a chip on your shoulder.

      You're being overly critical!

      SDL is nice, and so are a lot of other freeware graphics/audio libraries, but most every developer will tell you they still don't stand up to the massive suite of DirectX technologies. You've probably never even bothered with a DirectX app or an SDL app. I have done both.

      libSDL is not freeware, it's open source. Subtle but important difference. Furthermore, libSDL isn't just a graphics and video library. It handles threading, I/O, resource management, networking, and well, pretty much everything DirectX does. It's also highly extensible. ClanLib also falls into this category.

      So you've done both, huh? Care to show us the code?

      None are equivalent to the speed and power of DirectX.

      Speed in what sense? Does DirectX somehow have faster network speeds than libSDL? Pretty vague statement you make there. Of course from what I can see, DirectX games are typically slower than OpenGL on the framerate front.

      Hate Microsoft all you want, but that's just something you have to cede at this point in time. Why don't YOU do "research" before spouting off and insulting people for giving their opinions on the poor state of Linux gaming development?

      Really, neither of us has presented hard facts or evidence that one development library is superior to the others. I have presented two complete options that are open source and available for Linux, *BSD (including OS X), Windows, and lots of embedded platforms. DirectX is proprietary and only works on Windows. That's shameful.

      Furthermore, you say that Linux game development is in a poor state. That's a rather stupid comment to make, or you're just spouting FUD. I'm not sure, but it doesn't matter. Linux game development is not in a poor state. Loki has proven that we have all the technologies necessary to bring Windows games to Linux. Just because Loki didn't turn a profit doesn't mean that Linux game technologies are inferior. Proof: Loki ported many DirectX games to Linux that are fully functional and fully featured using libSDL. There's plenty of other game companies that have ported DirectX games to Linux quite nicely. And of course, we have id Software which simultaneously develops their games on Linux, MacOS, and Windows. That also shows that there are equivalent technologies available on all platforms.

      Sorry, but you're wrong.

    19. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1
      Look at your sig, you obviously have a chip on your shoulder...

      Fucker...

      Sorry... More seriously, what is so great about DirectX? I have used SDL, and it does everything necessary for games. Audio? Does it. Want/need advanced audio features, libsdl.org is a pretty decent one-stop shop. 2d video? Does that too. 3d graphics? SDL integrates OpenGL very nicely.

      Performance? I get a couple more FPS in Linux than I do in Windows in games that have ports for both OSes.

      --
      Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
    20. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, at least he's not constantly overly critical.

    21. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Really, neither of us has presented hard facts or evidence that one development library is superior to the others. I have presented two complete options that are open source and available for Linux, *BSD (including OS X), Windows, and lots of embedded platforms. DirectX is proprietary and only works on Windows. That's shameful."

      The proof is the market penatration in this specific instance. If Valve had equal access to both Direct X and SDL, why then did they choose to limit themselves to Direct X when they could have had the added Mac and Linux markets for almost nothing? If Valve had better access to one technology than the other, then there is a strong case for why that technology is better assuming they chose that technology.

      Questions I ask myself about SDL are things like the following.

      If I commit to using SDL for my foundation, given the 3 year cycle of many major game development, can I be sure that graphic card drivers will be up to snuff on my target platforms?

      Given that OpenGL is a consortium effort and that can new versions/revisions can take years can I be assured that the features I need will be present in OpenGL AND the SDL libraries?

      Do I want to use a middle man (SDL) who has little bearing OR influence on the providers of core technologies like OpenGL and hardware providers when I can have a single point of contact that is the centralized providers of the OS the Drivers and Libraries? Yes the game will only run on Windows, but unfortunately (for those not running Windows) that is also the bulk of the market.

      Finally ask yourself the question, do I want to bet my project on SDL being there and supporting leading edge features over Microsoft being in the same or better state? Steam looks to be a real gamble on Valve's part, I can see why they might have choosen Direct X over SDL.

      Having money thrown at them to do so, might have helped too.

    22. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Svartalf · · Score: 1
      None are equivalent to the speed and power of DirectX. Hate Microsoft all you want, but that's just something you have to cede at this point in time. Why don't YOU do "research" before spouting off and insulting people for giving their opinions on the poor state of Linux gaming development?


      Speed and power?

      Obviously you've not done your research.

      The code for replacing DirectPlay (one of the many libraries in the DirectX framework) with OpenPlay is actually simpler and produces smaller code. How is that powerful? The resultant code is no slower than the DirectPlay code that we can tell. How is that faster?

      I know these things because I just recently did the work to port the network code for Ballistics over from Windows to Linux.

      Unless you have done the work in both worlds, how do you know that it's faster or more powerful?

      You don't.

      I suggest that you speak from real experience next time.
      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    23. Re: Linux uses don't get it. by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's a recipe for SDL, OpenGL, OpenAL, and OpenPlay or ActiveNet.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    24. Re:Linux uses don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Man, you're all wrong again.

      SDL uses what ever underlying libs are available on the platform. On windows, this would be DX. Please investigate before spouting wrongness.

  26. directX by klocwerk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    it really comes down to the fact that directX is the most capable api for games at the moment.
    DX9 beats the living pixels out of OpenGL, and that's just a simple fact.
    I hate MS as much as the next slashdotter, but come on guys.
    Windows has Linux beat hands down for gaming.

    On another note, while freeBSD runs fine on my 500mhz via mini-itx board, I know I'm not the only person out there buying a whole new system for HL2 and Doom3 in the next few months. and guess what's going on the primary partition? It'll only get booted up to play games, web/e-mail can be done on anything.

    --

    "You worthless post!"
    -Shakespeare, 2 Gentlemen of Verona, 1. 1. 147
    1. Re:directX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      last I checked Q3 benchmarks shows Linux faster than WinXP...

    2. Re:directX by ogre2112 · · Score: 1

      It's got absolutely nothing to do with DirectX. Doom 3 is being released for Linux, and that is just around the corner. Supposedly using an OpenGL2 implementation, or so I read.

      This is about money, pure and simple. If they thought they would sell another quarter million copies by releasing a Linux client--they'd do it regardless any performance differences.

      iD is releasing it because they know from past experience they WILL sell copies.

    3. Re:directX by ensignyu · · Score: 1

      It's not a fair comparison -- DirectX is a whole gaming API and OpenGL is just for graphics.

      What we need is a nice complete open-source set of libraries for writing games. Unfortunately I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon (SDL is a good framework, but it doesn't cover everything.)

    4. Re:directX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "a simple fact"

      oh please. we all know directx has made gaming on the windows platform a real success...for various reasons...and not all of them technical.

      but your exageration reeks. can you sound any more gay? "beats the living pixels out of..." snip.

      opengl used properly, can hang.

      what? do you need some quotes from carmack?

      pipe down with the directx over the top spiel.

    5. Re:directX by La+Temperanza · · Score: 1

      http://www.khronos.org/ Now, if someone would implement it...

      --

      --
      est modus in rebus
    6. Re:directX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to research at an English university, it's only marginally harder to create a clickable link.

    7. Re:directX by swb · · Score: 1

      What we need is a nice complete open-source set of libraries for writing games. Unfortunately I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon (SDL is a good framework, but it doesn't cover everything.)

      Right, and what you'll get is three competing libraries with overlapping and version-mismatched dependencies, allies/enemies in various camps (Gnome/KDE, RH/Suse/Debian/BSD/GNU), proprietary closed source driver dependencies and almost no support from the actual game development industry.

      About the only problem it won't have is a take on the MySQL vs. PostgresSQL debate.

  27. yeah. by dolson · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    And important things, like recompiling the latest test version of the 2.6.0 kernel.

    1. Re:yeah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woohoo, another Linux newbie posing as a Linux God. Compiling a kernel is a piece of cake, and if you're doing it more than once, then you don't know what you're doing. Were you referring to something different?

    2. Re:yeah. by dolson · · Score: 1

      I never said I was a Linux god. I am a newbie. I don't know shit all about Linux. I can barely get it installed! I don't even know how to start X! Ask anyone, I'm totally clueless! ... That was a mild attempt at humor, relating to how often new test kernels are released and how Linux users... oh forget it. I suppose I should have said "compiling" instead of "recompiling." I should have known some smart-ass Linux user would jump on that because of how superior he is to everyone else in the world. Let me guess, you use Gentoo?

  28. Just boycott it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Vivendi doesn't release HL2 client for Linux, then they aren't getting my business

  29. id is where its at... by sput-pwk · · Score: 0

    Currently, I am able to play quake 3, warcraft 3, unreal tournament 2003, and wolfenstein enemy territory, all on red hat. I never really was a HUGE fan of half life.. but what I am waiting for is DOOM 3, which will surely have a linux port :) If you are a hardcore linux gamer, the next big thing will be from id.

  30. Think inside the bochs? by kgbspy · · Score: 1


    Tried using it with Bochs? I can't say I've tested it with something like Halflife, however it's got to be a better option for gaming than Wine(X) (hey, if someone can get Doom to run on it, who knows what's possible ;)

    --
    ~
    ~
    ~
    -- INSERT --
    1. Re:Think inside the bochs? by smcavoy · · Score: 1

      no it can't be better than WineX.

      Bochs is a IA32 emulator, you'd need to run Linux, bochs, windows, half life. That would make it slow

    2. Re:Think inside the bochs? by kgbspy · · Score: 1

      Ok, fair call. I will admit to not having used WineX much at all, or for that matter having tried any form of gaming on Bochs.

      But having said that, I'm sure it's not slow at all if you're... EXXXXTREME!!


      --
      ~
      ~
      ~
      -- INSERT --
    3. Re:Think inside the bochs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh, you're so funny. please, please tell me who writes your jokes...

    4. Re:Think inside the bochs? by kgbspy · · Score: 1
      --
      ~
      ~
      ~
      -- INSERT --
  31. the bottom line by NotAnotherReboot · · Score: 5, Informative

    The bottom line is, Valve is a company with many ex-Microsoft employees. They fully embrace DirectX 9. In fact, the reason that the Mac port that was almost completely finished was cancelled was because (I believe) they wouldn't be able to get them to network together due to DirectX concerns.

    Valve has made steps to ensure that Half-Life works under WINE, but the reality is, they will continue to use DirectX, as they feel that is how they can make the best possible game. The money that would go into creating a Linux box would be prohibitively expensive, not to mention perhaps impossible because of patents/copyrights on DirectX technology.

    It would be great if it worked under Linux, but the bottom line is it doesn't make economic sense.

    1. Re:the bottom line by TotallyUseless · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Actually, Andrew Meggs, the one man team who was doing the Mac port of Half Life, got Mac & PC networking working just fine, and got it into beta relatively quickly. That is actually what scared Valve. They realized they couldn't just release the Mac version and be done with it. If Macs couldn't play PCs, they could have just released the game and said 'have fun!', but with Mac->PC play, they would have had to update the Mac version every time they updated the PC version enough to change the protocol, or deal with the wrath of many angry Mac customers.

      They chose the easy and cheap way out... cancel the port

      --

      Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
    2. Re:the bottom line by Babbster · · Score: 1
      The money that would go into creating a Linux box would be prohibitively expensive, not to mention perhaps impossible because of patents/copyrights on DirectX technology.

      I don't think so. If a big issue is DirectX networking, then how do they manage to have a Linux server in the first place? Also, Half-Life had the ability to be rendered using either DirectX or OpenGL - it SEEMS like that would be possible with HL2 as well, thus giving the game the ability to be rendered in Linux (or any other OS with OpenGL compatibility).

      Other companies manage to do both OpenGL and DirectX in their games. They even manage to make Mac ports now and then. Some of them even release more than one game every five years...

      For me, it's completely irrelevant because I have never had (and may never have) a Linux PC. I further think that the passive resistance concept of avoiding Windows and other Microsoft products is beyond pointless. But the idea that it's somehow impossible to develop a game that works under both DirectX and OpenGL or that it's impossible to port games to different systems and maintain network compatibility is just ludicrous (and not in a hip-hoppin' way).

    3. Re:the bottom line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your wrong,
      because the problem is that the pixel shader standard of DirectX is already released and supported, whereas the OpenGL one is just at at the draft stage and not implemented and tested. The stuff working now is vendor-specific extensions, sometimes hidden behind CG.
      What john carmark talks about is not releavant because doom3 is *not shipping*. That means maybe the stuff will be there when doom ships, but the direct x shading is here *NOW*

    4. Re:the bottom line by Babbster · · Score: 1
      Forgive me, but how does that explain why a Half-Life Linux client was never released, or why a Linux port of HL2 hasn't even been put on the table for a future release (if the per-pixel shading is a game-killing issue that could DELAY the game)?

      My point was simple, though you might have missed it: It is not impossible to produce games that can run in both DirectX and OpenGL environments, nor is it impossible to port games from one system to another - originally DirectX or not. Whether the games have exactly the same graphics features is an entirely separate issue. RTFC.

    5. Re:the bottom line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They would; OpenGL extensions for pixel shader effects are already available from the primary graphics card vendors.

      This is why Doom III is coming out on Linux no strings attached.

      This isn't really about money or technology - just mindset. You have to be willing to do it, and it's a small enough community that it can be safely ignored - even if I don't like it.

    6. Re:the bottom line by Atomic+Fro · · Score: 0

      It makes me wonder if the "ex-Microsoft" employees didn't sign one of those "If you leave, you can't work for a competitor for x years" agreements. Microsoft might have brought it up, and let them stay in business if they kept their games to DirectX or Windows only.

      --

      ==================
      Hippie Logger Jock
      ==================
    7. Re:the bottom line by EpsCylonB · · Score: 1

      I don't think so. If a big issue is DirectX networking, then how do they manage to have a Linux server in the first place? Also, Half-Life had the ability to be rendered using either DirectX or OpenGL - it SEEMS like that would be possible with HL2 as well, thus giving the game the ability to be rendered in Linux (or any other OS with OpenGL compatibility).

      Nope, HL 1 was based around the quake engine (kinda a mixture of Q1 and Q2).

      HL 2 uses valves own proprietary engine called "source". We don't really know yet how different this is to the other major engines (Unreal, Quake 3, Doom 3 and others) but it almost certainly won't be able to be quickly ported like Q3 was (because it was designed to run on Linux and Windows from the start).

    8. Re:the bottom line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sort of. Here is a paragraph from an interview:

      ''Not that I want to open old wounds or anything, but can you tell us a bit about what you went through with the whole Half Life thing?''
      "The story's been told a thousand times, but to summarize, Sierra (the game's publisher) wasn't confident that the Mac version would sell well enough to support the ongoing development it would need to keep it in sync with all the updates to the PC version. So, rather than having customers get angry when their Mac copy suddenly stopped working with a newly-updated PC version, they told me to pre-break the network code so the Mac would only play with other Macs from day one. There was considerable controversy between Sierra and Apple as to what the sales projections leading up to that decision were and why they were that way, but as disappointing as it was I have to give Sierra credit for wanting to be honest with their customers about the capabilities of their product from the start. However, Valve (the original PC developer) got wind of the whole thing and basically said, "If you can't do the game right, don't do it at all," and that was that. A commendable attitude, but the real tragedy was that by the time this all occurred, I'd already blown six months getting the game into beta-testing stage with Mac-to-PC networking and everything."

    9. Re:the bottom line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The bottom line is, Valve is a company with many ex-Microsoft employees
      Dude, do you know what those guys did at Microsoft? They made Microsoft Bob , the infamous talking dog interface for Windows 3.11, then they quit.
      They hired some university students, and managed to stun & make laugh histerically the game companies who the Microsoft Bob people would try to licence their game engine from.

      I don't blame them for going the DirectX route. OpenGL is a pain to program with, the drivers the vary between bad and broken, it doesn't work properly with a wide range of video cards, the pace of development is too slow, & so forth.

      You may have noticed this. Basically, HL2 seems to have been designed with portability in mind, which is not something they'd care for if they're only going to release it for Windows/X-Box.
  32. Half-Life 2 by product+byproduct · · Score: 3, Funny

    Since 1/2 * 2 = 1, shouldn't this version of the game be simply called One-Life?

    1. Re:Half-Life 2 by forgotmypassword · · Score: 1

      Actually, if the a half life is how long it takes to reach half the initial state, then given exponential decay twice that would be ...

      Quarter-Life

    2. Re:Half-Life 2 by rritterson · · Score: 1

      No...

      after the second half life, only 1/4 of the original sample is left, so it should logicalle be called Quarter-life

      --
      -Ryan
      AUWYHSTOT (Acronyms are Useless When You Have to Spell Them Out Too)
    3. Re:Half-Life 2 by dcam · · Score: 1

      No, it should be called zero life, as any C programmer knows that 1/2*2 = 0.

      --
      meh
    4. Re:Half-Life 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The moderators who thought that was funny need to get "a life."

    5. Re:Half-Life 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Since 1/2 * 2 = 1, shouldn't this version of the game be simply called One-Life?
      Why did you multiply? Version numbers increment. It should be called One-and-a Half-Life or maybe Three Halves-Life.
    6. Re:Half-Life 2 by TeknoHog · · Score: 1
      Another silly physics joke coming along, escape while you still can..

      Does Schrodinger's cat have eighteen half-lives?

      On a related note, if Schrodinger was looking for regular patterns in the Universe, he should have used Schrodinger's grep instead.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    7. Re:Half-Life 2 by jooon · · Score: 1

      Thousands of gamers will run to the stores to get a life.

    8. Re:Half-Life 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So would the linux version be called: No-Life?

      *bada boom* Thankyou, thankyou.. I'll be here all week :-)

  33. You know how moviename II always sucks...well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I loved half-life....counterstrike was my know all be all in college. I played that game every night like there was no tomorrow...probably why I bombed out of college :-/ So take this into consideration as I'm casting my vote down now....

    I switched over to Linux as a desktop about three years ago...I dumped half life...it was a very very very hard thing for me to do because yes I was ungoldy adicted to it. I picked up Tribes2. Then after Loki died and Sierra wanted to patch only the Windows version of Tribes2 I started a petition....made a lot of people really ticked off about the things I said along the lines of Sierra making a commitment to Linux users because we use their network and it says this in our EULA...and yadda yadda yadda...it wasn't pretty. Eventually some guys that used to work for Loki ported it over without Sierra even knowning about it.

    But the brick wall I ran into when that entire thing went down made me realize that the gaming industry was not at all thinking with a full deck. No one seams to doubt in the tech field that Linux will only be gaining desktop space in the future and yet there is such a hard rock to move for even basic support under Linux. I really don't think it is only a matter of the # of Linux gamers out there....

    So out comes half life 2 now and at first I actually thought I had a choice to make....go back to windows just to play the game I was so in love with or tuff it out in Linux. This thought only crossed my mind for about 30 seconds but still it happened...and I'm sure those still addicted to the game are still thinking about it. Valve's creators new the success of Half-Life 1 being used under wine in Linux (the #'s of gamers here...not how well it did or didn't work)...they had two petitions in front of them to know how many people thought it was important to provide a Linux version long before Half-Life 2 was ever put into stone. They choose not to. They choose to ignore the biggest thing to hit the Tech world since Windows 3.1.

    I for one stopped thinking about Half-Life 2 when I saw someone post a link to this game that DOES have a linux version

    http://www.s2games.com/savage/downloads.html

    Something new and cool...something that I will not have to switch platforms just to use....why bother with valve...they've chosen their path.

  34. Linux gaming?? Nothing to see here, move along... by badmammajamma · · Score: 0

    I find it amusing that people still expect companies to make games for Linux. If you're really a gamer you need to get on Windows plain and simple. I don't like MS or Windows but I'm at least realistic about the situation.

    And no, the Mac doesn't count as a real gaming platform.

    --
    Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. -- H. L. Mencken
  35. HL for Mac. by Daleks · · Score: 2, Informative

    Linux users sad about no HL? How about Mac users? The Mac version of HL was essentially finished, but then axed by Sierra. Mention of it can be found here. How's that for getting stiffed?

  36. hardly a suprise... considering nerve's heritage.. by bani · · Score: 2, Informative

    gabe newell, head of nerve, worked for microsoft in various senior positions for 13 years...

    they are already talking about making HL2 an xbox-exclusive title, locking out PS2 etc.

    how friendly to linux do YOU think they could possibly be?

  37. Re:You know how moviename II always sucks...well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I loved half-life....counterstrike was my know all be all in college. I played that game every night like there was no tomorrow

    Translation: I couldn't get laid

  38. In case you haven't noticed.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Valve has a long reputation of discontinuing projects.

    Team Fortress 2 was originaly supposed to come out for half life, then they announced it as a separate game. After TFC came out, Team Fortress 2 turned into vaporware. Valve at one point did announce they were working on a linux port of the first half life, I don't know what happened to that. Counter-Strike: Condition Zero seems to also have dropped off of the radar.

    In fact, it realy wouldn't surprise me at all if Half Life 2 just stopped seeing any press releases, and suddenly turned into vaporware.

    1. Re:In case you haven't noticed.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Counter-Strike: Condition Zero seems to also have dropped off of the radar."

      Excuse me?

      They just released movies and a release date for it this week!

  39. IIRC, some forgot to read the advocacy how to... by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

    IIRC, the idea of porting Half Life to Linux was dropped after the Half Life crew recieved a large number of flames because there was a Linux server but no Linux client.

    There was also this from Linux Half Life:
    In a press release on the morning of Sunday, 1st of April, 2001 Valve CEO Gabe Newell announced that they had secretly been working on a Linux port of the most popular game, Half-Life.
    "We have taken alot of offensive email recently, asking for a port, all the while we have been secretly porting the game, it has been alot of fun."
    Valve's marketing department speculate that Half-Life will be a top seller for the Linux platform, despite the fact its getting relitvly old, and that it seems to work flawlessly under WINE.
    "We think that most of the Linux Half-Life players will purchase the game, in order to get native support, better performance and ofcourse to support the Linux gaming industry. Sales of Half-Life will determain if we port Teams Fortress 2 to linux".


    Which seems to contradict my original statement, however, that statement was made on April 1 2001*. And I still don't see a port. After the dismal sales of games for Linux such as Quake 3 and the rest of the Loki selection, I believe that Valve saw no profit in the port, and were probably tired of the flames anyways.

    FYI, for those of you who are about to bitch about the volume of Linux game sales:

    1) EB World stopped carrying Linux games because they did not sell.

    2) I bought every Linux game Loki made, with the exception of "Eric's Ultimate Solitare."

    If we want a Linux port, we need some way of making Valve *WANT* to do a port - either by making it profitable, eliminating the flames, or both.

    It is unfortunate that the open source community cannot come up with a way that the people in the community could provide the porting for Valve. Maybe some of the hot OS coders out there could agree to sign a NDA for Half Life so it could be ported? I know, I am hoping too much, but it is worth a try.

    * The date of that release also makes it very questionable...

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
  40. I switched from Linux to Windows XP for this reaso by SweenyTod · · Score: 1

    I really wanted to try the Unreal Tournament 2003, but my ATI card is too old, and they haven't released a driver for it that can run the game.

    Now I've played it a few times, I find myself wondering why I bothered. It would probably have been easier to buy a Geforce card and I'll probably do that before I switch back to Linux.

    I love linux but do miss the games you get on Windows.

    --
    Alas gallinaceas de urbe bovis volo
  41. Direct-X 9 by MikeD83 · · Score: 1

    Valve won't realease a version for Linux because it is doubtful they will support Open GL. All of their press materials and promos call Half-Life 2 a Direct -X 9 game.

  42. Linux Servers... by Pizaz · · Score: 1

    ... am I right or wrong? If you want to run a dedicated Half Life, Counter Strike, etc server, its a heck of a lot cheaper to find a company that will host your server on Linux than on a Windows 2k or Xp machine. Duh. http://www.fragism.com/prices.phtml Or do a google search on "half life hosting" -Pizaz

  43. Wesley Clark for President! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    General Clark is a 1966 graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point where he graduated first in his class. He holds a Master's Degree in Philosophy, Politics and Economics from Oxford University where he was a Rhodes Scholar.

    http://www.americansforclark.com/about.php

  44. Why? by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why do they Lament for half-Life 2?

    I have not the heart to tell you.

  45. How will I react to the release of Half-Life 2? by DeathPenguin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    By buying Doom 3 and running the native client in Linux.

    1. Re:How will I react to the release of Half-Life 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "How will I react to the release of Half-Life 2?"

      "By buying Doom 3 and running the native client in Linux."


      Yes, but can your box run that game? Half Life 2 will be less demanding on hardware.

      And are you blind enough not to see that this will be the game of the year?

    2. Re:How will I react to the release of Half-Life 2? by cK-Gunslinger · · Score: 1

      By buying Doom 3 and running the native client in Linux.

      Close. That should have been:

      "By waiting 3-6 months (or more), then buying Doom 3 and running the native client in Linux."

      =)

    3. Re:How will I react to the release of Half-Life 2? by ThoreauHD · · Score: 1

      I did the same thing. Who needs to write Valve when I can fuck them with my wallet. Oh the beauty of capitalism.

  46. I have just one thing to say ... by dzym · · Score: 1

    suck it up ... and wait for Doom 3

  47. XFree86 Isn't Exactly Fine-tuned for Gaming by SilentMajority · · Score: 1

    Is Linux a decent OS for server-side gaming? IMHO, yes and we see a lot more Linux servers hosting games like Wolfenstein Enemy Territory and others.

    Is Linux a decent OS for client-side gaming? It depends on the type of game and what your alternatives are.

    On the same hardware, why should I lose 1/2 of my framerate (FPS) just to use a different OS than Windows? As long as the game doesn't crash while I play it, then I could care less--although the security issues are of a concern on multiplayer games.

    Games like Half-life 2 will probably be much better when played on Windows until Linux finds something better than XFree86 for gaming.

    1. Re:XFree86 Isn't Exactly Fine-tuned for Gaming by niker · · Score: 1

      >XFree86 Isn't Exactly Fine-tuned for Gaming that's hardly true - the handycap is the implementation of the GL extension you're using in your X server. XFree86 is as tuned as he can be, taking in consideration that most GPU manufacturers don't release datasheets that would serve as driver guidelines, nor do they supply drivers as good as their Windows counterparts. It will also help improving performance if you have a preemptible kernel (like Windows does) and a better scheduler like linux2.6's.

      --
      Moderators: Don't agree? pray tell why.
    2. Re:XFree86 Isn't Exactly Fine-tuned for Gaming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh dear... We do have someone unbelievably stupid here! Ignoring the fact that your baseless claims about the performance of Xfree86 are wholly untrue, did it never occur to you that Xfree86 is not involved in the running of a modern game ( read fps / rpg with decent graphics ) on Linux at all* Its all done using whatever hardware implementation of OpenGL is on that system, the only software involved in the rendering is the drivers. So cretinous troll please take your feeble-minded, delusional rantings elsewhere.


      * The exception being Mesa, but I wouldn't be worrying about performance in that case, its always going to be dog slow! And if the game was windowed instead of fullscreen, Xfree86 would have to manage the window.

    3. Re:XFree86 Isn't Exactly Fine-tuned for Gaming by koali · · Score: 1

      Huh, yeah, so that's why the iD ports run so awfully on X. Oh wait, they run flawlessly.

      In fact, I'd say what sucks in Linux gaming is audio. OSS/Alsa/esd/artsd/jack... too many different solutions and, guess what, for example the ID games only support OSS, afaik.

    4. Re:XFree86 Isn't Exactly Fine-tuned for Gaming by Art+Tatum · · Score: 2, Informative
      In fact, I'd say what sucks in Linux gaming is audio. OSS/Alsa/esd/artsd/jack... too many different solutions and, guess what, for example the ID games only support OSS, afaik.

      ALSA has an OSS compatibility layer. I routinely play RtCW (and RtCW:ET) in Linux and the sound is great. Haven't used OSS in *years*. And ESD and aRTs are just sound mixers/managers, use one or the other, or neither. It doesn't really matter. JACK is a special callback-based API for music applications. You don't really need it for games. I think they've got an ESD plugin though, so....

    5. Re:XFree86 Isn't Exactly Fine-tuned for Gaming by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1
      On the same hardware, why should I lose 1/2 of my framerate (FPS) just to use a different OS than Windows?

      Not that you could tell the difference between 90 FPS and 90.5 FPS anyway. But using an operating system that frustrates me, from a company with business practices I despise, is more distasteful to me than losing half a frame-per-second. So I'll go on playing iD titles and BZFlag on Linux. But as somebody else here said, to each his own. It's just a matter of preferences and what irritates you more.

  48. Even the Windows users might skip it... by emarkp · · Score: 1

    Considering the current plan with Steam is that once you download a patch or play online, you have to be connected to the net even to play single-player. I've already lodged my complaint, though most likely Valve won't care.

    1. Re:Even the Windows users might skip it... by flend · · Score: 1

      I really can't imagine Valve launching HL2 in England with such a system. Many people here (such as myself) have to pay-per-minute for internet access. Probably less than 50% of people who would buy HL2 have broadband or unmetered dialup (and that has 2 hourly cutoffs typically).

    2. Re:Even the Windows users might skip it... by jjhlk · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that isn't true. At least in one instance: if you buy the single-player only version. Otherwise, I wouldn't be too surprised if the multiplayer-also version to connect for single player, since LAN games can't be played now without internet access. It doesn't make sense though so I doubt it.

      So far, the new HL interface with steam is nice, but starting the game is slow and buggy (I haven't been able to play DOD yet). I may just sit out HL2 - I'm trying to use linux more anyway.

  49. The real reason why Half Life 2 isn't on Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Nobody's willing to pay the $699 they would have to charge in order to sell it.

  50. Strike two on Valve. by Whammy666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm a little disappointed with Valve about now. Strike one is the DRM nitemare called Steam that they're shoving down the gaming community's throat. OMG! What a fiasco that is. Strike two is the shutting out of linux users. If Id can support linux, why can't Valve?

    What I don't fully understand is why Valve went with DX9 over CG and openGL, especially since DX9's HLSL is essentially identical to CG. CG offers cross-platform compatibility. DX9 limits the portability of HL2. So why do it?

    --
    When all else fails, run.
    1. Re:Strike two on Valve. by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I'm perfectly fine with someone trying to prevent piracy. But to implement it through a live net connection is just fucking gay! I would rather pay an extra 5 bucks for an included USB dongle that contained a unique ROM ID number on it. If not that, at least something other then always haveing to have a live connection. Fuck that. Sorry for the french, but damn......

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:Strike two on Valve. by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      ATI loves HLSL. Valve is in bed with ATI. You figure out the rest.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    3. Re:Strike two on Valve. by 100lbHand · · Score: 0

      steam is nuts

      I bet you that Valve is going to try to figure a way to charge a monthly fee to play TF2 or CS2, hell probably HL2 down the road too.

      --
      "I'm not high, just stupid" --JY
    4. Re:Strike two on Valve. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is CG cross-platform if you don't have a Nvidia card?

    5. Re:Strike two on Valve. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "just fucking gay"

      And you're just a fucking bigoted loser.

    6. Re:Strike two on Valve. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Silly person, Cg works on all cards that support the required fragment ( read pixel if you don't understand ) and vertex shaders. So yes you can run Cg programs on your ATI card :0)

    7. Re:Strike two on Valve. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, there seemed to be much hatred in that statement

    8. Re:Strike two on Valve. by stor · · Score: 1

      > I bet you that Valve is going to try to figure a way to charge a monthly fee to play TF2 or CS2, hell probably HL2 down the road too.

      That's exactly what I'm expecting. I wouldn't be at all suprised if it soon became necessary to pay a subscription to play CS1.6. From what I've read, you need to authenticate on the Steam network to even play LAN games of SteamApps.

      And it gets worse: the Steam client is goddamn buggy, expects you to redownload CS from the Steam network (>350Mb) and only works after some serious futzing. My housemate still can't get it to work after a week. I somehow got it to work on my box but it decided to break last night which required more futzing and black magic to get it working again *shrug*

      Steam blows.

      Do you think that VALVe is getting a little too big for their boots and has decided to start screwing their customers? I hope not.

      I was very excited about HL2 until Steam came along.

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
    9. Re:Strike two on Valve. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      If Id can support linux, why can't Valve?

      simple... the caliber of programmers and management.

      Comparing Valve to ID is comparing a 6th grade computer intro class to a grad student CS class.... they aren't even in the same league.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    10. Re:Strike two on Valve. by SQLz · · Score: 1

      The answer is that Gabe is ex-Microsoft and he knows the implications of HL2 on Linux. I would venture to say at least 100,000 to 250,000 poeple would migrate to Linux over the next 2 to 3 years if HL2 was available. Maybe even more. HL2 is one of those apps that would push Linux on the desktop into a new realm. Gabe and Valve are not going to be responsible for that.

    11. Re:Strike two on Valve. by Afty0r · · Score: 1
      I wouldn't be at all suprised if it soon became necessary to pay a subscription to play CS1.6.

      I doubt it, this would be illegal in most countries. The game was not sold with a notice of subscription required, or as a service.
    12. Re:Strike two on Valve. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because a game that's also available on Windows and is probably easier to install on that platform will drive 100,000 to 250,000 people over to Linux.

      Where are you getting these numbers? You seem to assume there's this huge untapped community just waiting for a chance to use Linux, and all they need is one game to do it. Which is especially odd given that games that include Linux clients don't seem to disappear from shelves any faster than their Windows only counterparts.

      Well, maybe there are some people waiting for that, but it's not going to be a port of Half-Life 2 that does it.

    13. Re:Strike two on Valve. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Source engine is head and shoulders about the all-show no-go engine your idol at ID is whoring right now, so you may want to turn that around.

      They used DirectX because it's better than OpenGL right now. Period. End of story. No whining changes that DirectX can simply produce better looking games.

    14. Re:Strike two on Valve. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I hate to abuse the anonymous coward position here, but you are a bonafide retard son.

      Half Life actually used Quake ONE's engine believe it or not, they just modded it so much that it actually outshined Quake 2 by a great deal. Nope, no skill there either.

      Half Life 2 runs on "source", a nearly 100% Valve developed engine save for the Havok physics system.

      Source also beats Carmack's frilly DooM3 engine up and down the block in pure features.

  51. Thank $DIETY . . . by edinho · · Score: 1

    . . . that we still have lots of people who still have some fight in them. Heaven knows we already have too many give-uppers who will bend over at the drop of a dime. OK, Mr. Realistic, bend over now. Ready? Here it comes!!!

    Cheers,
    e.

  52. The same way I reacted to Duke Nukem... by Ieshan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wait a long time for it's release.

  53. problem, set, match and solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    this redundant post simply points out that Valve understands the strength of Linux... as a server. As for a desktop for Joe Gamer, it is not there yet. Many bitch about MS not getting its crap straight internally and of their refusal to abide by standards.

    Then there is the Linux GUI mess. So much to choose from... but unlike picking your favorite car that runs on all the roads and uses the same fuel, all these cars require special catering. As a result, a patchwork of gas stations, peripheral shops, garage shops, tire stores, highway departments and even traffic ticketting methods have popped up. Sure, we can all point to "Gravel Definition Language (GDL)" and "Open Road Sign Language (ORSL)" but those do not fix the whole problem. I sincerely hope that the Linux / Open Source... well just the non-MS providers start working together to fix this (have you seen the 'tudes from some of the various forums and mailing lists? Bloody flame fests they are). That will be a glorious day when developer studios will start popping out Linux releases of games the same date as the Windows versions. Until then... like it, love it, emulate it or wait and hope.

    What/who this post is not by:

    • Windows user
    • winex user
    • wine user except in emergencies
    What/who this is by:
    • windows desktop killer hopeful
    • gamer in stasis
    • one annoyed yet entertained at the still very evident 1337 presence of many a self labled hacker
  54. Re:hardly a suprise... considering nerve's heritag by jeeryg_flashaccess · · Score: 1

    Please! Half Life 2 MIGHT run on a PS2, but there is no way it is going to look "Half" decent too!

    The X-Box only port is not some giant conspiracy. It's just a better gaming platform for Half Life 2.

    (P.S. I run linux)

    --
    Life is like pants... fit in or you don't fit in.
  55. hey why _only_ Linux ? by mmu_man · · Score: 1

    There isn't only Windoze+Linux in life !
    There are many other OSes out there, why coudn't they have it too ?
    Besides, usually when company release Linux versions, they only give binaries for specific versions and of course only for x86.
    No wonder why PPC can't compete... *g*

  56. Otherwise known as... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Freemannus Interruptus. Very unsatisfying.

    I will wait for a while to see what the status of a Mac port of HL2 looks like. Chances seem slim, but the Mac market has expanded since the original HL so there might be enough motivation for a port. Still probably a few years down the road though.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  57. Um... by Obiwan+Kenobi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Technically, this probably means that some small part of the engine runs under Linux. In the past, dedicated servers have been little more than headless clients, clients without a rendering engine. As with Half-life, there is probably no technical reason that Half-life 2 couldn't run under Linux, especially given that the latest Linux drivers from ATI and NVIDIA have expanded support for even the newest hardware released by those vendors. Given that a game as new as UT2003 runs under Linux, I think that it isn't that much of a stretch to say that Linux could handle Half-life 2 as well.

    No, it doesn't. Just because you can run a server, which people connect to and run maps from, doesn't mean your server is actually "rendering" anything. It's loading data for your clients to read/write to, and its controlling the flow of that data. Linux does this much better than Windows, which is why the Linux server exists in the first place. No one would bother cooking up a dedicated server for it otherwise.

    But Half-Life 2 is DX9 from the ground up. This means it uses extensions, functions, and rendering calls that are so deeply ingrained into windows, that you can NOT run the game any other way. This is where WineX and whatnot come into play, taking those same function calls and telling Linux how to use them.

    Firstly, this type of translation is going to make any port of the game run slower, until the code is much faster than it will be in the first few WineX releases supporting it. Yes, I know how fast UT2003 can run in Linux. But have you seen the tech demos for HL2? It will be quite some time before we see that level of speed and clarity on a Linux system.

    And, this sounds really pathetic, but their licensing agreements with Installshield may hold them back as well. From what I recall, this is the same thing that held up NWN from being released on Linux. The Windows registry can be a shit-filled bog, and the Installshield makes the game-makers lives that much easier. It sounds pitiful, but little stuff like that can hold up development.

    And finally, Valve has busted their ass on Steam, and even though it stumbled out of the gate with their recent full-on release (who didn't see that coming), they put so much time and effort on a solid DRM release platform that to try and convert that to Linux, who by nature is a registry-less system, would be too much time and trouble for a company to put themselves through, let alone farm out the work at considerable cost.

    In this dreamworld that the article-writer lives in, he forgets that game companies are under intense pressure to deliver perfect product all of the time. It is easier to leave it up to the community than to put serious time and resources into making the same thing available on both OSes.

    And don't forget about DRM. We geeks chuckle at it, but the fact remains that as the years go on, and MS has its way (which it always does, eventually), between the Windows versions of iTunes and delivery mechanisms such as Steam, you'd be surprised at how this will begin to hold Linux back, in my opinion. DRM is awful, I agree, but everyone loves iTunes and what is it but a wolf in sheeps clothing (nice interface and high moral standing but really just DRM)?

    Food for thought.

    1. Re:Um... by ptr2void · · Score: 1

      What's the point of this post? Linux gamers are complaining that Valve focuses on DX9 and you're explaining to us why DX9 won't work properly on Linux. So what? We knew that already. UT2003 proves that a modern game using OpenGL and running on Linux is totally feasable. HL2 has a few new effects, but the principle is the same... Next point: What are you talking about when you mention licensing agreements with InstallShield? Heck, common Linux distros don't even HAVE a registry. The Loki installer seems to do the job just fine for other game developers. Why is that beyond Valve? I'm even more clueless what iTunes or DRM should have to do with HL2. I mean REALLY clueless. BTW: Both are equally possible on Linux. It's just that nobody cares, because Linux users are thought to be too clever (or evil) to be stopped by boobytraps like DRM. Well, the community is changing... More and more Linux users don't know C, can't fix a makefile and won't break DRM mechanisms in their free time.

    2. Re:Um... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "No, it doesn't. Just because you can run a server, which people connect to and run maps from, doesn't mean your server is actually "rendering" anything. It's loading data for your clients to read/write to, and its controlling the flow of that data. Linux does this much better than Windows, which is why the Linux server exists in the first place. No one would bother cooking up a dedicated server for it otherwise."

      Actually, Windows Server 2003 is faster at this sort of thing than current Linux distros

    3. Re:Um... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's only one problem with part of your argument. STEAM RUNS ON LINUX MORON.

    4. Re:Um... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      In this dreamworld that the article-writer lives in, he forgets that game companies are under intense pressure to deliver perfect product all of the time.

      That's not quite so true in the Windows market, where it is possible to deliver updates and patches. It is very definitely true in the console market, where the only way to update the product is to supply a new cartridge. That pretty much explains the heavy emphasis on QC at most good game outfits.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  58. Re:You know how moviename II always sucks...well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    come on now...we're all reading slashdot at 1am on happy hump day.....the moral of the story is: Some people can get laid sometimes...some people can laid all the time....some people can get laid only a few times very rarely...some people can get laid a lot by one person their entire life...but noone can be laid by everyone all the time. Or something along those lines.

    Or maybe a better question would be: could he not get laid because he was playing a game to much...or was he playing a game to much because he couldn't get laid. Now which would be worse? Maybe he had his fill of sex in high school and decided to take a few years off...lol. Or maybe you should just be modded down as flamebait.

  59. Re:I won't be buying it -- Won't help Linux by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Nice sentiment - unfortunately it does not mean much. The lack of sales due to people using Linux won't hurt Valve in any measurable way. The problem really is that if you want to play games, you have to have Windows.

    I tried this a few years ago, I switched entirely to Linux on my home PC. Guess What? I had a bunch of nice Loki Games, but other than Quake 3 I could not deathmatch with my friends in games like Half Life.

    That did not do me much good. So, I started looking into different ways to get Half Life to run under Linux, wine, etc. I had to fiddle with drivers, modify stuff etc...

    Then I realized I was wasting my time for an ideal. I did this same thing all day at work on Linux servers. And when I got home the last thing I wanted to do was tweak my OS just so I could play a couple games with my friends.

    So, sure, your logic makes sense if you only use your PC for browsing, MP3's and email - which I mostly use mine for. However, a large number of my friends play Half Life*, and I like to play with them.

    The fact is, that there are a large number of people who want to play games on their PC's, and I am one of them. It would be wonderful if I could run Linux with a MacOS X interface, and have all the software out there run on my system just fine. But we don't have that. So, while it is good that you are maintaing your ideals, and not buying Half Life 2 to support Linux software. In the long run it makes no difference either way.

    What CAN we do?

    Well - find some way to make games profitable for Linux. Sure, it is a chicken and the egg problem - Linux needs desktop dominance for that, and that is a LONG LONG way off for Linux (unfortunately).

    *And now America's Army which does have a Linux client, but the communications software we use does not.

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
  60. will never happen by nexex · · Score: 2, Insightful
    hl2 linux client will never happen, it uses directx.

    "DirectX 9.0 has been crucial in helping us create a worthy sequel to Half-Life, one that gives Windows gamers everything they've been waiting for, a truly unequaled experience," said Gabe Newell, cofounder of Valve. "We are thrilled that our relationship with Microsoft has produced a title that all of us can be proud of."

    --
    Winter 2010: With Glowing Hearts
    1. Re:will never happen by flacco · · Score: 1
      "DirectX 9.0 has been crucial in helping us create a worthy sequel to Half-Life, one that gives Windows gamers everything they've been waiting for, a truly unequaled experience," said Gabe Newell, cofounder of Valve. "We are thrilled that our relationship with Microsoft has produced a title that all of us can be proud of."

      He then daintily dabbed the puddles of jizz off of his lips and chin with a "Where Do You Want To Go Today?" moist towelette.

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    2. Re:will never happen by Svartalf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Uh, then why do we have UT2k3, Ballistics, Heavy Gear, Descent3 and others on the way? All of those games happen to be DirectX games. Unless they wove DirectX throughout the ENTIRE game engine code (not bloody likely from what I've seen in the past from other game companies), DirectX doesn't preclude at least an x86 version for Linux.

      Now, having said that, Valve has a tight relationship with MS. It's not likely that there will be a port because of that reason, but not for the reason you state.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  61. windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Boot into Windows? ...Get the Xbox version?


    isn't that redundant?
  62. Half Life 2 - An OS/2 Users Lament. by Yaztromo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Welcome to earth. Nice to have you here.

    This has been an issue in computing for the last decade: PC game companies write games for Windows. That's the way it was, that's the way it is, and unless something drastic happens, that's the way it's always going to be. Gamers use Windows because it's the platform the majority of PC games are on, and PC game companies target Windows because that's where the vast majority of their audience is.

    This isn't a Linux-specific issue either. As an OS/2 user for the last 12 years (and Linux user for the past 4 or 5), I've seen it first hand. The only thing that will potientiall change the situation is if the game companies either see a huge decrease in the sales of their Windows titles, or feel there is sufficiently pent-up demand for Linux-based titles.

    Personally, I don't see that happening anytime soon. My advice to you is to do what I did -- leave your PC for serious work, and go out and buy a PlayStation 2, a good TV, and a surround sound system. Add in the network adapter and the PS2 Linux kit, and you have a kick-ass game system, DVD player, and Linux box all in one nice black box, leaving your PCs available for more serious computing tasks.

    Yaz.

    1. Re:Half Life 2 - An OS/2 Users Lament. by SQLz · · Score: 1

      I can boot into XP faster than I can get up, go into living room, pick a crappy game from my selection, and load up the PS2.

      Personally, I don't see that happening anytime soon. My advice to you is to do what I did -- leave your PC for serious work, and go out and buy a PlayStation 2, a good TV, and a surround sound system. Add in the network adapter and the PS2 Linux kit, and you have a kick-ass game system, DVD player, and Linux box all in one nice black box, leaving your PCs available for more serious computing tasks.
  63. Why not taking this as a challenge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As others said, Valve is a company aiming at the widest possible market for its products. That means Windows, period.
    Now, why on the earth some good hackers don't take that lack of games as a challenge and start writing THE engine for a 3d gaming platform under Linux -aimed_at_gamers_and_not_engineers-?

    Yes, ther are already some, but after a multi bazillion files download and resolving a nightmare of dependencies 9 times out of 10 the engine simply doesn't compile, the game doesn't install or something just doesn't work.
    C'mon guys, stop whining and do some work to let common people play games under Linux; there's no point in writing a game aimed at the average Joe Gamer if it requires a kernel hacker to compile and install.

    I also see great commercial opportunities in the future for a well designed gaming engine under Linux. Suppose you are a company that produces game consoles, would you spend tons of money to develop your software or rather take a free kernel, a free game engine and aim all your efforts into designing advanced hardware to make the above run on? Think about the ease of Linux kernel and software portability.

    I'm a Linux programmer, sadly not the one who could even start a project like this, but if I had the skills I'd seriously consider starting a project in that direction.

  64. That..... was what needed to be said by Zrech · · Score: 1

    At the BEGINNING of this thread. lol. Doom 3 WILL own HL2 just b/c ID is such a better company then Valve. I mean really, have any of you paid attention to the recent we hate Nvidia scheme that valve is spewing out?? All those "benchmarks" that are supposed to show how well the game runs, use a driver set that puts the ati card to the advantage. It doesnt even look that great truthfully. I have seen the vids, and the FIRST thing I noticed was the amazingly large ammount of jaggies. I really really really HATE jagies with a vengece. I run 8xAsio and 4xAA just for that reason. With a game like HL2 I wont be able to, and it looks as though it will not be the eye candy that everyone was hoping for.

    1. Re:That..... was what needed to be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Doom 3 WILL own HL2 just b/c ID is such a better company then Valve.
      AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
    2. Re:That..... was what needed to be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're such a fucking nVidiot.

      Bravo. It's people like you who will keep nVidia in business and providing at least token competition for ATI (to keep them motivated).

      THE DETONATORS NVIDIA WANTED THEM TO USE WERE NOT RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC YET. And, you know what else? They DO make the game faster but they make it look like pure shit at the same time.

      Go figure. The drivers used for the Radeons were released drivers. The codepath used for the Radeons was pure DX9. nVidia wanted not only "optimized" codepaths (since FX sucks at DX9) but BETA, HACKED, UNRELEASED drivers.

      Yeah, that's fair.

      I reiterate: you're such a fucking idiot. Do a little research before you post. The truth is out there, as they say, and it doesn't cease to exist simply because you find it distasteful and disappointing. Live and learn.

      And, oh yeah ... next time, buy the Radeon. I mean, heck, my 9700 Pro, based on 18 month old tech, which cost me only $250 is twice as fast in DX9 as a brand new 5900Ultra for TWICE THE MONEY. Now that I think about it, if I owned an nVidia card I'd probably be pretty pissed off too ... but I don't.

      Go check out AquaMark3, too, btw. That Valve's fault, too?

  65. 200-Life by Kelmenson · · Score: 1
    Since 1/2 * 2 = 1, shouldn't this version of the game be simply called One-Life?
    Since that joke has been made so many times, shouldn't it be 200 Life?
  66. BECAUSE THEY ARE PRAGMATIC, NOT RELIGIOUS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Don't expect every single programmer to adopt this religious Microsoft vs. Linux crusade that so many here on Slashdot have succumbed to.

    Not everyone hates Microsoft, and not every one cares enough to cut off their nose to spite their face. These HL2 guys know which side of the bread is buttered, and they SHOULD cater to the Windows crowd. They outnumber Linux clients by, what... 45 times? There are more PS2 and X-box users than Linux end-users.

    And the fact is, you will play it on a Windows box. HL2 will kick so much ass that if you don't have a box, you will be forced to copy it (I'm quite sure most slashdotters don't even have a legal copy of Windows anyways) and use Windows to play it.

    Kudos to the UT developers and id for having the spare time to throw a bone to all the linux geeks, but this is an exception, not the rule.

    1. Re:BECAUSE THEY ARE PRAGMATIC, NOT RELIGIOUS! by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      Maybe if there were more games for Linux, more gamers would use it.

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
  67. Re:You know how moviename II always sucks...well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Warcraft1 was pretty good.

    Warcraft2 was better than Warcraft1, but Warcraft3 was a waste of $50.

    Maybe Halflife will be like Warcraft... Note to self: Don't buy Halflife3. :)

  68. Host Server = ^Class Rank^ by smarthippy · · Score: 1

    I'm a Computer Science major at a Prestigious Southern University with huge network pipes. I plan to host a few CS2.0 Linux servers at 10 ping. This will improve my class rank significantly without the need to spend a dime on arguably less ethical or lawful means.

  69. Re:IIRC, some forgot to read the advocacy how to.. by Yaztromo · · Score: 1
    * The date of that release also makes it very questionable...

    When do companies ever release a press release on a Sunday?

    And trust me -- no reasonable company anywhere ever makes a press release on April 1st. They'll date it March 21st or April 2nd instead.

    Yaz.

  70. perspective by nuonguy · · Score: 1

    You said it yourself: they're not going to get rich selling a linux version of HL2. That's the deciding factor.

    Think about it from their perspective. From my experience, the PC industry does not put much emphasis on good design, maintainability of software or the even the assumption that the software base will need to be maintained for more than a few years. With those kinds of development practices, porting to another platform is hard, takes time, costs money, and might engender grumblings by the PHBs who wonder why the effort to port to such a small target.

    I think it'll take at least one significant successful game on Linux to change challenge the idea that it's not profitable. Would HL2 (assuming it's as good as the first one) on Linux do it? You don't even believe it yourself.

  71. Half-Life 2? not worth the effort. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i used to play half-life on this linux box. it ran better and looked prettier than on windows. but i gave up half-life and its mods at least 6 months ago.

    i got sick of the poor quality of the games, the constant bugs, security flaws, and general lack of what i like to see in a community. not to mention the fuckers couldn't port the shit natively like the codebase they originally forked and bastardized into the sorry excuse for a graphics engine it is today.

    i play just about everything else now. half-life 2 won't be gracing this linux box, even if WineX is hacked up enough to support whatever monstrocity Valve has cooked up. Doom III, on the other hand, will be getting my full attention...

  72. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Insightful

  73. Re:You know how moviename II always sucks...well.. by jgisclon · · Score: 1
    Warcraft2 was better than Warcraft1, but Warcraft3 was a waste of $50

    What's not to like about WC3?

  74. ohhhhh... by utexaspunk · · Score: 4, Funny

    so THAT's why they call it W(h)INE...

  75. DirectX is the proprietary problem (as usual) by Quizo69 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As others have mentioned, the problem is that Valve embraced DirectX 9 as the only API they would use to run the game.

    The stupid thing is, they couldn't even just say they would code pure DirectX 9, because Nvidia in their wisdom decided to implement DirectX 9 in their own proprietary way, thus leading to the current public spat with Valve saying they had to code separate paths to have Nvidia hardware work with the game anyway!!

    It really is time that a game protocol is made that is truly able to be used as a cross-platform API. I mean, game developers must surely realise that if they were able to code in one API and have it compile under Windows, Linux, Xbox, PS2, GameCube etc, they would make way more money servicing all the market segments, not just one, and save on development costs to boot!

    OpenGL 2 is touted as being all that DirectX 9 is and more, plus it is an open protocol, but game developers need to use it and help formulate it for it to be a success.

    I use Windows because of the games. That's the ONLY reason. Linux is more than capable of being my primary OS for web browsing, email, office work etc. But without developers coding for Linux, it will never gain the crucial support of the younger generation whose first question will be "What games run on it?" And if you don't hook 'em while they're young, then you will lose another generation to Microsoft's grasp.

    ATI and Nvidia both supply 3D drivers for their cards, so why aren't they trying to get developers on board to actually code or port GAMES for the Linux market???

    Someone really needs to write a GameOS version of Linux, and basically give it away as open source. If one or two top games like Half Life 2 or Doom III were able to run on it, it would soon saturate the market and provide developers with a free alternative to developing purely for Microsoft. Heck, why doesn't Sun write it? It could be a whole new line for them and firmly establish them as a true competitor to Microsoft. Just make it an open source game protocol is all I ask.

    1. Re:DirectX is the proprietary problem (as usual) by LarsWestergren · · Score: 1

      Someone really needs to write a GameOS version of Linux, and basically give it away as open source. If one or two top games like Half Life 2 or Doom III were able to run on it, it would soon saturate the market and provide developers with a free alternative to developing purely for Microsoft. Heck, why doesn't Sun write it? It could be a whole new line for them and firmly establish them as a true competitor to Microsoft.

      Java games on mobile phones are catching on in Europe at least. The ability to use Java on the phones is becoming a selling argument, I have had friends choose Motorola or Sony Ericsson mobiles before Nokia because they had Java. Also, didn't Sun and OpenGL recently announce that the multimedia APIs for Java (Java3d for instance) would tie into OpenGL?

      So think of Suns point of view. They can either use a huge amount of resources to make GameOS version Linux as you suggest. It will take time, and considering how things went for Loki games and those who have tried to do a Linux console, a very risky project.

      Or, they can continue to try to move everyone onto Java as a cross platform for gaming. This would probably be easier since they have open source people working on OpenGL for Linux and other platforms. It is beginning to have a market, as with the mobile phones mentioned above, and most importantly, is a technology they can control.

      --

      Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

    2. Re:DirectX is the proprietary problem (as usual) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be best to show my disapproval at their using the proprietary DirectX API by not buying the game. But I really want to play HL2. Therefore I will either share a copy, wait a while and buy a used copy, or steal one.

    3. Re:DirectX is the proprietary problem (as usual) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If one or two top games like Half Life 2 or Doom III were able to run on it, it would soon saturate the market and provide developers with a free alternative to developing purely for Microsoft.

      you may or may not remember that Quake III was released in the same metal collectors tin for Linux as it was for windows. in the tin, you not only got quake III, but a copy of turbo linux.

      this is a great way to distribute a game if you ask me: Buy a game, get a free OS! (or at least the media for an OS that is free). you can't beat free stuff with a stick!

    4. Re:DirectX is the proprietary problem (as usual) by s88 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "It really is time that a game protocol is made that is truly able to be used as a cross-platform API. I mean, game developers must surely realise that if they were able to code in one API and have it compile under Windows, Linux, Xbox, PS2, GameCube etc, they would make way more money servicing all the market segments, not just one, and save on development costs to boot!"

      And surely you realize that such an abstraction will either require significant architectural concessions from all platforms, or will inevitably lead to slower performance on all platforms. Its called optimization, and it is almost always the enemy of generalization.

    5. Re:DirectX is the proprietary problem (as usual) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Ooh! Yes! It's all DirectX's fault! They should have used an API that wasn't completed yet, for which even Windows drivers have not been written yet (for the GLSLang compiler, which is provided by the IHV), instead of, like it or not, the de facto standard.

      Of course, they could've used Cg... HAH.

    6. Re:DirectX is the proprietary problem (as usual) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Someone really needs to write a GameOS version of Linux, and basically give it away as open source."

      Yeah someone really needs to do that. As long as it's not me. To much work.

    7. Re:DirectX is the proprietary problem (as usual) by gid · · Score: 1

      I use Windows because of the games. That's the ONLY reason. Linux is more than capable of being my primary OS for web browsing, email, office work etc.

      As do I, except recently I found that Oracle's JDeveloper doesn't run our application under Linux, rather frustrating, so I have to boot up my Windows "game" box for JDeveloper work. :(

  76. I get better performance in Enemy Territory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I play Et exclusively in linux. I have it installed in both windows and linux, but I might as well uninstall it in windows as I never play it on windows. They roughly get the same fps. But just overall smoothness is much better, probably due to swap file activity.

    And people can say dx9 is so much better, but why did value make hl1 d3d when the engine behind it was native opengl. You sure can't argue dx was the better tech back then

  77. Makes business sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since not only is Windows better optimized for gaming than Linux, but the market share for it is huge compared to the small section of Linux nerds that think all software should be free; why would the company waste their development resources porting it to Linux?

  78. Why there's no client by Tuxinatorium · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The reason they made a linux dedicated server but no linux client is twofold:

    1: The dedicated server is simpler and easier to port because most of the source remains unchanged and you don't have to fuss with OS-specific API's and graphics libraries beyond the very rudimentary GUI

    2: Linux is sucessful in the realm of servers, but is not yet a mainstream primary desktop operating system. Sure, maybe there are 10% as many linux desktop installs as windows, but the vast majority of those linux users also have a windows partition or another computer running windows, therefore it's not worth porting the client to take advantage of an extra 1% of market space.

    1. Re:Why there's no client by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 1

      and ..

      3. Linux users are lover's of open source (free) stuff. Why would they want to spend money on the game?

      4. The average computer user doesn't understanding how to coax linux to cooperate with their sound card and doesnt want to waste their lives learning how to, let alone struggling to make it run a new game properly.

      5. The home installed base of Linux is not big enough for Valve to make a profit from the effort of making a Linux version of the game. Think the base is big enough? .. recall that most of us run Linux on a spare parts computer who's hampsters couldnt handle space invaders let alone anything with pixel shaders.

      --
      George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
    2. Re:Why there's no client by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 1

      actually no, we license the software, we don't own it. remember to read the fine print in those EULA's.

      my point in comment 3 was that many linux users would rather spend a week making something work in linux that is trivial in windows. Thats's great if you like to tinker but add up all that spent time and even a coder from India could buy his windows license and have a good week spent enjoying his game while you're still trying to get linux to recognize your CD burner.

      --
      George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
    3. Re:Why there's no client by praedor · · Score: 1

      And yet, idSoftware CONSISTENTLY produces equally good linux clients for all their games within rather short order of the doze release. As I understand it, the linux client for Doom 3 will be coincident with the doze client...AND idSoftware makes money on their games. There is no real "loss" from their doing linux ports. They produce their games the RIGHT way so that it is virtually a mere recompile away from being a linux game. No pain, no muss, and no loss. You can include a linux client on the same CD as the doze client. You can do it ala idSoftware and make it "officially" unsupported (yet id game clients are pretty damn fine even being "unsupported").


      You lose IF you do these two things ala linux client: 1) release it months AFTER releasing the doze game version, and 2) attempt to sell this late version in the stores. Gamers are impatient and given that there has never been a solid timetable for release of linux games, generally just "when they're ready" or worse, no official word at all, gamers simply assume nothing is forthcoming and buy the doze version. The alternative doesn't work either...they may be willing to wait a few weeks for a linux client but after that, fuhk it, buy the new, hot game NOW and play it NOW. This situation has described the pathetic attempts at commercial linux games up til now (with very few exceptions). idSoftware has finally gotten it right. Instead of selling a separate linux client, they release the doze game and provide a linux client for download. Simple, painless, works.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
  79. Re:directX...never forget by mabhatter654 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Yes, directX is very cool. but never forget that when MS wanted to release Xbox they tanked PC game developement over a year to make it happen. When it's time for Xbox2, what's to stop MS from grabbing all the good games...again. [oh wait, that's on the same games main page as this article!] Or diverting all the developed DX9 games away from PC. After all, remember we still don't HAVE Halo 3 years after there was a working PC demo. Once MS picks it's "friends" if you don't already have a plan to sell games somewhere else, you'll be needing one fast...not the best time to learn Linux.

    Basicly, look how much the users have spent on 3d cards only to have MS cherry-pick the very best games for their own "system". Remember when you use directx you're just a beta-tester for the next MS toy!

  80. You will have to continue using Windows... by carbona · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...if you are a hardcore gamer. Sorry people. That's just the way it is.

    Valve can hardly be blamed for trying to defray enormous development costs by concentrating on the platform the vast majority of gamers will use.

    Linux on the destkop has made tremendous strides, particularly in the last two years, but it's still a long way from being able to draw mainstream gaming developers from spending a significant portion of development time to have their games run on it.

    Do I like this? Of course not. But all we can do as a community right now is continue to support those developers that do release official Linux clients with our wallets. We can also continue to help our friends and family make the leap to our OS of choice. Linux will get there. It's just going to take some time. But blaming developers for not releasing Linux clients will get us nowhere. They will jump on board on their own when a substantial user base is there who purchase games for Linux. If you have any doubts about that theory, just look at IT industry giants like IBM, Sun, and Dell and their about-faces in the course of the last decade concerning Linux support.

    One last point, as far as I'm concerned, Mac users have had much more to caterwaul about than Linux users. The treatment they've received from game developers pales in comparison.

    Looking for a Linux/Windows tech monkey in the Los Angeles area? Please see my resume.

  81. I'll buy Doom3 instead by modme2 · · Score: 1

    That will have a proper linux version, look how good Enemy Territory is.

  82. Having run many popular Linux hlds processes... by Heretic2 · · Score: 1

    I can say that they are certainly screwing over the HL1 mod market. I current run one of the premiere Natural Selection servers known as Texas [HK] Palace.

    We have a nice rig on an incredible network. However, Natural Selection is an incredible CPU hog. This is confounded by the newest version of hlds (3.1.1.1d+ on Linux, 4.1.1.1d+ on win32 I think) which uses 50-100% more CPU than hlds 3.1.1.0. Now, in the past we've had the choice on which version to use. With DoD, we need 3.1.1.1, same goes for CS1.6. On Natural Selection, the coolest HL mod IMO, we have to run 3.1.1.0. hlds 3.1.1.1 uses TWICE as much CPU has hlds 3.1.1.0.

    HL2 is removing our choice to run 3.1.1.0 or 3.1.1.1. They're removing WON authentication and replacing it with a new Steam powered system to make way for HL2. It will lower the total number of slots available for Natural Selection because few servers will have the dedicated CPU time to run a stable server of more than 18 players.

    We will probably be forced to drop 4 to 6 slots from our NS server to accomidate an HL2 server. Or be forced to splurge on a dual-opteron to run the amd64 build of hlds.

  83. Don't buy the damn game by n1k0 · · Score: 1

    It won't kill you. Just spend your time doing something constructive.

  84. Re:I won't be buying it -- Won't help Linux by zannox · · Score: 1

    Try Teamspeak. It has a windows and linux client, as well as a server for each platform. Free, as in beer!

    --
    I've nothing of importance to say, now go away before I taunt you with a second sig!
  85. LOL Xbox Version by Araxen · · Score: 1

    Like the Xbox version will be close to the PC version. IMO, The PC version is the only version to play and I own all 3 consoles plus a PC.

    1. Re:LOL Xbox Version by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 1

      well obviously!

      name any console that can play anygame at more than 1024x768 resolution.

      --
      George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
    2. Re:LOL Xbox Version by iainl · · Score: 1

      "name any console that can play anygame at more than 1024x768 resolution"

      Well, 1024x720 is only slightly less, but the games that the XBox runs at that look just fine to me.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    3. Re:LOL Xbox Version by iainl · · Score: 1

      "Like the Xbox version will be close to the PC version"

      Quite, the PC version isn't going to be able to come close when my PC only has a GeForce DDR card and a processor below the one in my XBox...

      For all a specced to the max PC will play it better, I could buy three more XBoxes for the price of just a Radeon 9800, let alone a new motherboard, processor and memory.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
  86. Re:I won't be buying it -- Won't help Linux by MrResistor · · Score: 1

    Nice sentiment - unfortunately it does not mean much.

    It means more, statisticly speaking, than my vote in a presidential election, and yet I still drag my ass to the polls every chance I get. To say that I shouldn't vote because my one vote is like a spit in the ocean is just plain stupid.

    What it comes down to is this: Windows isn't the only thing I gave up a year ago, I also vowed to never again pirate software. I don't care how great of a game HL2 is, it's not worth the $300 or so it would cost me to get it and a legitimate copy of Windows to run it on, never mind the however many hours of patch/reboot/repeat it'll take to get it running properly. Windows is aggravating enough when I'm being paid to deal with it, I'm certainly not going to subject myself to that in my spare time and on my own dime. I can get all the games I'm currently interested in playing, all of which are already ported to Linux, for less money than that, and it will take me less time to get them all installed.

    I tried this a few years ago, I switched entirely to Linux on my home PC. Guess What? I had a bunch of nice Loki Games, but other than Quake 3 I could not deathmatch with my friends in games like Half Life.

    I got Half-life running under wine without difficulty, same with Counter-strike. You are aware that progress has been made on Linux in the last few years, aren't you? With Q3, RtCW, and UT2k3, that covers all of my gaming need currently. (I like America's Army, but their authentication servers seem to have serious issues) I know people who have been happily gaming exclusively on Linux for over 3 years now.

    What CAN we do?

    Well - find some way to make games profitable for Linux.


    I don't know about you, but I'll continue doing exactly what I've been doing: buying games that support Linux, and more specifically buying them from vendors like tuxgames that make a point of letting the producers know that my copy was bought to be played on Linux.

    Dual booting and buying all the newest and greatest Windows-only games certainly isn't going to solve the problem.

    But, to each their own. Clearly, games being made available on Linux isn't important to you. Fine, that's your choice. It is important to me, and I've decided to do something about it; namely voting with my wallet. It may not be terribly effective, but what else am I gonna do, buy a game that won't run on my computer?

    --
    Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  87. (Politely) voice your opinion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Email addresses of Valve Software execs and developers: http://www.valvesoftware.com/people.htm

  88. id by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm quite confident Doom3 will run on Linux, do i WILL spend my money somewhere else ... to ATI

    Ok really, i don't understand this running after the latest feature-bloated fun-extender. Quake won't be any less fun after HL2, so play with yourself Valve!

  89. dual-boot by IshanCaspian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you want a decent desktop OS and games you have to dual boot. Period. That's the god-awful truth and it's not changing any time in the next 5 years.

    --

    But there is another kind of evil that we must fear most... and that is the indifference of good men.
    1. Re:dual-boot by Dunkirk · · Score: 1

      Frankly, gaming on _either_ platform leaves a little to be desired. I'm starting to think that I ought to just go buy a console rather than deal with Linux's lack of polish _or_ Windows' lack of stability. It would be nice to be able to sit down, pop in a disc, and just PLAY, for cryin' out loud. Instead, I find myself wrangling drivers revisions and patches in order to deal with and a continual flow of performance glitches and crashes.

      --
      Acts 17:28, "For in Him we live, and move, and have our being."
    2. Re:dual-boot by LMCBoy · · Score: 1

      You seem a good fellow, so I can't understand your indifference on this topic ;)

      --
      Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
    3. Re:dual-boot by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      While Windows stability hasn't been a concern for me, I alwaysd manage to get the right hardware and every iterations of Windows always run pretty smoothly (well,98SE, 2000 did and XP does now), I've bought a console.

      Like you said, it's nice to just to pop in a disc and play. To patches, no driver revisions (except maybe if you have Xbox live, but they've made it seamless anyway, so it's not a huge hassle as on Windows or Linux) And games just feel better when played with a gamepad then when played with a mouse and a keyboard. (Ok, maybe Halo would have been better with a mouse/keyboard combo, but it still rocks nonetheless)

    4. Re:dual-boot by tuffy · · Score: 1
      If you want a decent desktop OS and games you have to dual boot. Period. That's the god-awful truth and it's not changing any time in the next 5 years.

      Too bad I can't get a decent desktop OS and lots of pretty shrink-wrapped games at the same time. So I'll just stick with Linux and use my Gamecube for gaming instead.

      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

    5. Re:dual-boot by jjhlk · · Score: 1

      That's pretty much my only problem with consoles: the gamepad! While it does rock for almost every kind of game out there, I could never play an FPS without a mouse. I know you get better with the gamepad for aiming with practice (I've played golden eye), but it just isn't good. And FPS seem to be my number one genre right now.

    6. Re:dual-boot by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      I think you shouldn't judge gamepad aiming if you haven't tried the more recent controllers. I haven't had the chance playing a FPS with a PS2, since I don't own a PS2. But I've played FPS on the Xbox and they control very well with the two tumbstick. It doesn't feel too awkward, since the left thumbstick (left hand) controls the player's movements and the right thumbstick (right hand) has you control where you look. So you're still using the left hand (keyboard on a PC) to move around and the right one to look around. The only difficult thing to do is looking around while shooting, and that's probably why console FPS don't rely you on shooting too many targets that are on top of under you, but mainly stay a eye level of your character or don't differ much.

  90. Nerve's heritage? WTF are you talking about? by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    bani? The same bani thats trying to turn Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory back into Return to Castle Wolfenstein?

    Wow, for such an influential guy you're kinda an idiot.

    Gabe Newell = Valve = Half-Life
    Nerve = Nerve = Return to Castle Wolfenstein

    Man, the just plain wrongness is staggering. Wait until I tell your boys at PlanetWolfenstein. Next thing you know you'll be claiming Splash Damage made Unreal Tournament. You think whoever let you in on the ET source would like to hear about you spreading this kind of slanderous false information about Nerve and Activision?

    +1 Inaccurate is more like it.

  91. A lot of people argue by phorm · · Score: 1

    That linux is unpopular because it doesn't run a lot of windows games, or not well at least. I've got news for you, windows doesn't run windows game well either. I've got a game sitting right here, works on my PC, but on another machine (with specs that well exceed game recommended) it craps out.

    Now, tell me the wonders of gaming on an MS platform, because in many cases it is still hit-and-miss as to whether your game will work 100%.

    What would be nice, is a game booting off a liveCD. If I can get a full OS+Productivity apps to load off a mini-CD, one would think that booting off a standard disc or perhaps DVD would run a game rather well.

    And for savegames? Perhaps a USB memory stick (hell, they're pretty cheap, an 8mb or 4mb wouldn't cost much) and/or the ability to mount off a hard drive. If you can slap a memory card in a PS2 you can figure out a USB stick.

    Seems to me that the ability to boot a productive running kernel without an HDD should be a boon that potential game developers should consider. At that point the pre-loaded OS becomes a rather moot point.

    1. Re:A lot of people argue by Keeper · · Score: 1

      I've got a game sitting right here, works on my PC, but on another machine (with specs that well exceed game recommended) it craps out.

      Wow, the detail here makes your claim SO believable ... what, Wing Commander II doesn't work on your 1ghz Athlon?

      Now, tell me the wonders of gaming on an MS platform, because in many cases it is still hit-and-miss as to whether your game will work 100%.

      In many cases for who? I don't know one person who's had a problem with a game they've bought. I know I've never had a problem.

      What would be nice, is a game booting off a liveCD. If I can get a full OS+Productivity apps to load off a mini-CD, one would think that booting off a standard disc or perhaps DVD would run a game rather well.

      And for savegames? Perhaps a USB memory stick (hell, they're pretty cheap, an 8mb or 4mb wouldn't cost much) and/or the ability to mount off a hard drive. If you can slap a memory card in a PS2 you can figure out a USB stick.

      They exist. They're called consoles.

      Seems to me that the ability to boot a productive running kernel without an HDD should be a boon that potential game developers should consider. At that point the pre-loaded OS becomes a rather moot point.

      You're missing one minor detail ... DRIVERS. Shipping a bootable cd for your game in pc land will never happen -- there are just too many different video cards, too many different sound cards, too many different network cards, and too many different ways to hook up a joystick (not to mention the different kinds of joysticks) and/or keyboard. Not to mention hardware that is released AFTER the game ships.

    2. Re:A lot of people argue by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      In many cases for who? I don't know one person who's had a problem with a game they've bought. I know I've never had a problem.

      You're kidding right? Almost every game I buy seems to require a patch or ten to get working properly. Take Battlefield 1942, for example. Go look at their support boards for endless examples of the trouble people have getting games working on Windows. Crashes to desktop, random disconnections, crappy netcode.

      I don't really buy many games any more on the PC (too busy playing Day of Defeat and Zelda), but the basic procedure seems to be:

      1. Install game
      2. Doesn't work. Try all 'voodoo' fixes suggested by tech support/message boards. Update all drivers/bios etc
      3. Still problems/crashes
      4. Wait a week or two
      5. Download patch
      6. Actually play game
    3. Re:A lot of people argue by CrosseyedPainless · · Score: 1

      Appropriately enough, I had a bitch of a time getting the original Half-Life to work on Windows. Obviously, they must have eventually issued a patch (or many patches) that fixed the problems, but I had already given the CD away by then.

    4. Re:A lot of people argue by phorm · · Score: 1

      Um... just FYI. Go try out gnoppix or morphix

      Video drivers you say? The greater majority of systems I plop this one into run very nicely in the GUI. Now for accelerated video drivers... it could be a bit more of a pain, but I'm sure if they've come this far they could figure it out.

      Oh, and yes, as mentioned consoles use savable memory cards. They're also taking games away from the original internet-gaming system (the PC)... so perhaps if a linux system that in some ways worked like a console would be better than a console that acted like a PC (hard drive, network addons, etc).

    5. Re:A lot of people argue by Keeper · · Score: 1

      Video drivers you say? The greater majority of systems I plop this one into run very nicely in the GUI. Now for accelerated video drivers... it could be a bit more of a pain, but I'm sure if they've come this far they could figure it out.

      If you're talking games, you're talking accelerated drivers. And with everything burnt onto a cd, you only get support for hardware that exists at the time the game shipped, which sucks for pc gaming. Want to play a game you bought 2 years ago on your new pc? Tough luck, it won't work.

      so perhaps if a linux system that in some ways worked like a console would be better than a console that acted like a PC (hard drive, network addons, etc).

      Except with the PC is acting like a console it isn't doing anything better than a console. You're playing a game. The only way a game on-cd works is if it has a static hardware target. The PC world isn't static.

    6. Re:A lot of people argue by phorm · · Score: 1

      It won't work? Why not?
      Nothing is restricting the CD from loading files off the hard-drive, and linux can read windows and 'nix files equally. The idea is to make a bootcd semi-independent of the loaded OS, not the hard-disk itself. Most people wouldn't object to having a /livecd folder on the hard-drive - which the game CD could scan for on bootup.

      The aforementioned USB-dongle could also be used to save an updated driver, or, with the above mentioned, to reference the mountpoint where the file is saved.

    7. Re:A lot of people argue by Keeper · · Score: 1

      Then you lose the entire advantage from booting off of the game disk -- you now have to have something installed on a standard way on your harddrive. The whole point of the boot-from-cd is to have a game that works without having anything else installed. When you start requiring a certain directory layout with certain files preinstalled, you've basically got another OS installation -- at which point I'd have to ask "why bother?"

    8. Re:A lot of people argue by phorm · · Score: 1

      True, but that's only after the point if it can't liveboot by itself, which in most situations one would hope that it still could.

      Another solution would simply be to have a "companion disc" for updated drivers etc. Lots of games load off multiple CD's anyhow... though I thing this would just make it a bit more annoying.

      By default, you could boot-from-CD, need only the hard-disk for incompatible drivers or perhaps savegames - which again a USB-dongle would save you the trouble of this (and heck, if it were a generic USB-mass-storage people just find it cool to get the additional USB dongle with the game - no different from console memcards).

    9. Re:A lot of people argue by Keeper · · Score: 1

      True, but that's only after the point if it can't liveboot by itself, which in most situations one would hope that it still could.

      Your optimism is greater than mine, and having to go through those steps negates the benefits of using the "everything on cd" console-like approach.

      Another solution would simply be to have a "companion disc" for updated drivers etc. Lots of games load off multiple CD's anyhow... though I thing this would just make it a bit more annoying.

      A bit annoying is an understatement ... brings back memories of installing Office for Win3.11 ... insert disk 1, insert disk 2, insert disk 3, insert disk 2, insert disk 3, insert disk 1... bleh. Shoot me. Not to mention what would happen when you start mixing disks with different updates of drivers, and keeping track of what's what.

      which again a USB-dongle would save you the trouble of this

      The USB dongle/sotrage device doesn't save you from anything. It's just a different storage device from the HD. A much SLOWER storage device than a HD. And you've still got the issue of getting everything in the right place configured properly.

    10. Re:A lot of people argue by phorm · · Score: 1

      What issue? Load up the USB mass-storage driver. Save to USB. And is it really that much slower than an HD, no moving parts and with USB 2.0 it should be reasonably fast.

      As per inserting different disks. Yes, blah, annoying... but not that much worse than the old sierra games (5 1/4 floppies with Kings Quest on a 286 or less anyone?) or perhaps something like Final Fantasy where the game spanned CD's (until DVD took over as popular format).

      Also, how are newer cards for legacy support? I know that Nvidia drivers often come bundled now, so perhaps an older Nvidia card could run a future GeForce 7 on a GF4 commanset, just without the inherant extra functionality (which, in and old game, wouldn't matter anyhow).

    11. Re:A lot of people argue by Keeper · · Score: 1

      What issue? Load up the USB mass-storage driver. Save to USB. And is it really that much slower than an HD, no moving parts and with USB 2.0 it should be reasonably fast.

      How is this different than having to create a special file system/directory layout on the harddrive? It isn't. And USB 2.0 be damned, all of those mass storage devices use flashram, which isn't incredibly exactly the fastest stuff on the planet (I have yet to see one max out on a pre usb2 port ... took me 5 minutes to copy a 150mb file, or roughly 500k/s).

      As per inserting different disks. Yes, blah, annoying... but not that much worse than the old sierra games (5 1/4 floppies with Kings Quest on a 286 or less anyone?) or perhaps something like Final Fantasy where the game spanned CD's (until DVD took over as popular format).

      It doesn't matter, having to insert disks in a special sequence just to play the game sucks. Especially considering the only reason you'd be doing it is for drivers.

      Also, how are newer cards for legacy support? I know that Nvidia drivers often come bundled now, so perhaps an older Nvidia card could run a future GeForce 7 on a GF4 commanset, just without the inherant extra functionality (which, in and old game, wouldn't matter anyhow).

      Legacy support among video cards doesn't matter. Eventually the architecture changes, and it won't be backwards compatible. Not to mention what happens when a new manufacturer comes to market with a new card. Or what happens when AMD/Intel release a new mobo chipset. Or when the next IDE standard comes to market ... and so on.

    12. Re:A lot of people argue by phorm · · Score: 1

      In the end it doesn't matter hugely though. Games lose support over time, and a lost of my older games (win95/98, DOS) don't won't on XP anyhow - so not a huge different.

      As per the USB-drive though, the advantage would be in autodetecting and using the drive, as well as portability. No specifying hard-drive save locations, etc. Most users could probably figure out how to stick a USB dongle in the port... and if you consider that a proper liveCD game would run in most PCs you could drag dongle and game disc with you anywhere...

    13. Re:A lot of people argue by Keeper · · Score: 1

      As per the USB-drive though, the advantage would be in autodetecting and using the drive, as well as portability. No specifying hard-drive save locations, etc. Most users could probably figure out how to stick a USB dongle in the port... and if you consider that a proper liveCD game would run in most PCs you could drag dongle and game disc with you anywhere...

      No, you've still got the same problems as with a harddrive. You still have the problem of getting the drivers into the right place on the usb dongle for instance. On top of that, the drivers on your dongle won't work on your friends pc (who happens to not have the game or the drivers needed to make the game run). And you'd have to choose a dongle to save to if more than one are plugged in -- and unlike a console, the USB dongles aren't going to be labeled. And "easy" to insert depends on the computer -- a large number of computers still don't have USB ports on the front of the case.

      And I still challenege the notion that a "proper" liveCD game will run in most PCs -- unless you're talking about tetris or solitare. There is definately a REASON why nobody distributes games in that form for the PC.

  92. But atleast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But atleast when I was running an Amiga, there was a VAST gamming library.

  93. Re:Linux gaming?? Nothing to see here, move along. by moncyb · · Score: 1

    I find it amusing that people still expect companies to make tires for Ford cars. If you're really a driver you need to get on Yugo plain and simple. I don't like Yugoslavia or Yugos but I'm at least realistic about the situation.

    And no, cars made by Chevy or Toyota don't count as a real driver's vehicle.

  94. How it should be done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wolf ET Linux, free as in free beer:

    http://www.fragland.net/index.php?page=downloads &d id=834

    http://www.fragland.net/index.php?page=downloads &d id=981

  95. My Lament by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's Linux, no one gives a shit. Just stop trying, go join OS X, which is, weither you want to admit it or not, is everything you've ever wanted Linux to be. Or join the WinCrap crowd. Or Unix, or SCO, or whatever else, just jesus, give up on this pile of garbage already. At least the Penguin is cute.

  96. Re:hardly a suprise... considering nerve's heritag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The PS2 wouldn't be capable of HL2 in any real, uncompromized sense. Both the XBox and Gamecube could probably handle it, but porting to the Gamecube would be a bit of work. The XBox, on the other hand, is just a matter of tweaking. And I'm a Gamecube fan - I'm just pointing out that there are sound reasons for only having an XBox version.

  97. Linux needs a Killer Game by Max+Threshold · · Score: 1
    We need a truly kickass game to be developed exclusively for Linux. Even this wouldn't change the world overnight, but it would certainly start the snowball rolling.

    Fact: Linux is never going to make inroads onto the desktop with all these stupid boring business apps. We need games, man, kickass games!

  98. What?! HL2 won't run on my toaster with netbsd?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So here's a typical slashdot response. I mean, just because it runs on Windows and not linux, you have a bajillion people calling shenanigans on Valve. I didn't hear nearly as many complaints when Nintendo released Legend of Zelda for the Gamecube only. And the same can be said for any third-party-developer game released for a single platform, so don't say that's a bad analogy.

    And of course, for those people who say that it's the same hardware, so it should be easy, well, just look at how long it took to get WINE working. It's not easy. It's essentially developing for a different platform even if the hardware is the same.

    So before you get all self-righteous about this, just stop and think for a second. If you're about to whine because Valve won't support your platform of choice, just remember that you made a choice. No one's forcing you to use linux. No one but you. And quit saying that Valve is in bed with Microsoft. It sure seems that they've been pretty linux friendly, compared to say... ohh. I don't know. Blizzard. And pretty much everyone else out there. Sure there are some exceptions, but in the end, they're about making money, and yes, you hate that, but many of you live in America, and enjoy doing so, what with the whole democracy and capitalism thing going on, imperfect though our implementation may be. Like the subject says, this is like whining about it not running on your toaster with netbsd. So. Yeah. Stop it.

  99. Inexcusable Insult my ass by EnglishTim · · Score: 1, Funny

    They haven't written it for OS/2, either!
    Or BeOS!
    Or PalmOS!
    There's not even a whiff of a C64 or Amiga version!

    THE BASTARDS!

  100. Get a life by Unominous+Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Half Life 2 = Life.

    Get one today :)

    --
    "Smoking helps you lose weight - one lung at a time" -- A. E. Neumann
  101. Open an on-line petition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps open an on-line petition.
    While you're at it, open a petition for homeworld as well.

  102. Think you've got problems? by __aafkqj3628 · · Score: 1

    You think you Linux users have got problems? How the hell do you think us mac users have to deal with this?

    Go cry me a river.

  103. Re:I won't be buying it -- Won't help Linux by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

    What it comes down to is this: Windows isn't the only thing I gave up a year ago, I also vowed to never again pirate software. I don't care how great of a game HL2 is, it's not worth the $300 or so it would cost me to get it and a legitimate copy of Windows to run it on, never mind the however many hours of patch/reboot/repeat it'll take to get it running properly.

    This is the reason I don't own a console - instead I own a PC with legit software.

    I don't know about you, but I'll continue doing exactly what I've been doing: buying games that support Linux, and more specifically buying them from vendors like tuxgames that make a point of letting the producers know that my copy was bought to be played on Linux.

    I constantly sent back the registration cards for games with "Purchased for use with Linux" scrawled on them in bright red letters. I also own every game from Loki except "Eric's ultimate solitare" - (I don't like solitaire) even though I have only played half of them.

    But, to each their own. Clearly, games being made available on Linux isn't important to you. Fine, that's your choice.

    Having games run on Linux *IS* important to me. The problem simply became that I was spending more of my personal time fiddling around with an OS, than I was doing other things, such as playing the games. I work with Linux all day, and for a server, I would accept nothing less than Linux or BSD. Why?

    Because, for me, it is the fastest (my time wise) solution, and less expensive than windows (both in time spent, and cash spent).

    However, I have found that (for me) Linux as a gaming machine did not meet my requirements. There is often an extra layer (Wine for example) that makes the game run slower under Linux than Windows. Also, given that I do all my admin work at the command line, PUTTY allows me to access my servers, which are Linux based, just fine.

    I view my computer as a tool - as a means to an end. Unfortunately, my personal time is valuable to me, and I can only support so many causes with my time. One of the things that I choose to do with my free time is computer gaming. It is unfortunate that Linux consumes more of my time in toying with it to reach that goal. Conversely, Windows eats more of my time when I try to use it as a server, therefore I choose Linux in that situation.

    I guess I belive in using the right tool for the job. While it was fun using Linux as my desktop OS, and toying with various window managers, multiple desktops etc. I found it just ate too much of my time up.

    When this changes, and Linux consumes less of my personal time on the desktop, I will switch back to using it on the desktop - but not until then.

    On the server level, I cannot see Microsoft producing an OS that will consume less of my time than a *nix.

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
  104. Re:I won't be buying it -- Won't help Linux by Mjlner · · Score: 1
    And now America's Army which does have a Linux client, but the communications software we use does not

    Have you tried Teamspeak? A friend of mine who has tried a lot of comm software on Wintendo says this is the best on Wintendo. (And the software is just about identical on both plats.)

    --
    Lemon curry???
  105. poor you. by bani · · Score: 1

    yes, i was thinking valve but typed nerve. any fuckwit could have made that connection after i mentioned gabe newell. it was beyond your feeble comprehension i guess.

    but if your life sucks so much that you need to 'tattle' about an obvious typo to make yourself feel better, then go ahead and perform your mental masturbation on planetwolfenstein.

    1. Re:poor you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Way to represent the company, dumbass. Go work for Ubi, they need people of your caliber.

    2. Re:poor you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thinking valve but typed nerve? No wonder your mod is so full of bugs.

      Oh and writing pwned instead of owned is a typo. As in "bani got pwned." Writing nerve instead of valve is an error based on ignorance.

  106. why the hell should valve be required to support.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    every little os out there? should they also make custom releases for redhat, debian, suse, mandrake, etc..? and what about mac? and lindows will probably need it own because its so f-ed up. what the hell requires them to support your pissy little platform that hardly anybody in the real world uses. get real and stop being such a pretentious group of pricks.

  107. Idealist B.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I can get all the games I'm currently interested in playing, all of which are already ported to Linux..."

    Oh really... you're not just conveniently uninterested in any games that aren't ported? Will you still be making such a claim after HL2 is not ported?

    And you'd really have to spend "$300 or so" - for example if you decided to dual boot with Windows for the sake of gaming? Uh, no, another exaggeration. Even if you did have to buy (hard to believe), you could do so at under $100.

    Your points have less of an impact when filled with obvious half-truths and exaggerations...

    There's no shame in a dual boot setup my friend.

    1. Re:Idealist B.S. by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      Oh really... you're not just conveniently uninterested in any games that aren't ported?

      In the interests of my own convenience, yes, I'm much less interested in games that aren't available for Linux. More on that below.

      Will you still be making such a claim after HL2 is not ported?

      Yup! I'm far more interested in ut2k4, to be perfectly honest. The main selling point of HL2 for me is CS2, but I've been enjoying ut2k3 enough that I've pretty much stopped playing CS these days, so it's not that strong of a pull for me at this point.

      And you'd really have to spend "$300 or so" - for example if you decided to dual boot with Windows for the sake of gaming? Uh, no, another exaggeration. Even if you did have to buy (hard to believe), you could do so at under $100.

      Well, I don't pirate software anymore (that must be the idealist BS you're talking about), and I don't have a legitimate copy of Windows (or an illegitimate copy for that matter, since I tossed all my warez when I made the switch).

      I haven't looked at prices for HL2, but my bet is that it will retail in the $60-70 range. According to the quick search I did just now WindowsXP Pro can be had for about $140 (OEM) or $240 (Retail). I'm sure, if you are indeed a real geek, I don't have to explain the reasons why I'm wouldn't be interesting in XP Home or any of the 9x's, which are clearly what you're refering to in your comment.

      Anyway, when you add them together and calculate tax, and most likely shipping, the result is close enough to $300 that the difference is irrelevant to me. Of course, the cost doesn't stop there. It has been said that Linux is only free if your time is worthless. Well, I buy the upgrade version of every release SuSE puts out, so that's a little over $100 a year. My time is certainly not worthless, in fact the fair market value seems to be about $25/hour at the moment. Guess what? Based on my experience, and considering all the numbers, Linux is still considerably cheaper than Windows. THAT is why I switched, not because I'm some sort of idealistic zealot.

      There's no shame in a dual boot setup my friend.

      Shame has nothing to do with it. Windows is simply unreasonably expensive in terms of money, time, and aggravation.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  108. Get with the program by n1k0 · · Score: 1

    Assuming the poster was requesting a single, unified API for multimedia development, he has two APIs from which to choose, and either choice should satisfy his request. He doesn't need to use a 'number of differing libraries'.

  109. Linux Game Market smaller than advocates believe by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The point is that you have to expend money, resources and time to make a Linux client. Why are you going to do that when 95% of your user base can/will use the Windows version anyway?

    Just to clarify and elaborate on your point, the 95% are Linux folk not Windows folk. Most Linux gamers dual boot or run Wine, they are already customers. A Linux port would not generate new money, it would merely replace a Win32 sale with a Linux sale. That's a loss from Valve's perspective, more work, no new money.

    The Linux Game Market is not anyone who would buy and run a Linux game. It is only those who would never buy the Win32 version, those who would do without and not dual boot or run Wine.

  110. In Transgaming I trust... by marcushnk · · Score: 1

    They better bloody come through, cause its gonna suck being the only one at a LAN party without HL2 running.

    --
    "Consider how lucky you are that life has been good to you so far. Alternatively, if life hasn't been good to you so far
  111. Use your real name by rostfrei · · Score: 3, Funny
    It is unfortunate that you (and many others) will sacrifice your principles for a game.

    It's sadly amusing that we get lessons in morality from somone that doesn't even have the wherewhital to use their name.

    Oh, wait... this is Slashdot.

    1. Re:Use your real name by scott_evil · · Score: 1

      What's even funnier is that nobody recognises it as a troll, you're all too far left wing to know when someone is taking the piss.

    2. Re:Use your real name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, right on. I mean, why should I respect the opinion of somehow who posts under the name Anonymous Coward? No, I believe it is important that every logs in. That way I know to pay attention to the opinions of important posters such as Fuckface98 and rostfrei, simply because I know who they are! If I want to contact a poster about a post I have read on Slashdot, all I have to do is call directory assistance and ask "Can I have the number for Fukcface98 please?" and I can call them right away!

      Why just last week, I read an amusing peice by the poster Foobarblaz. I remembered him from last year; I believe he's a male causcasion, 25 years old, lives in a 2 bed rented house in PA.

      You idiot.

    3. Re:Use your real name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So your parents named you Rostfrei?

      Couldn't think of a name for their baby, so they look through the cutlery drawer for inspiration...

    4. Re:Use your real name by Snaller · · Score: 1

      It's sadly amusing that we get lessons in morality from somone that doesn't even have the wherewhital to use their name.

      Oh, wait... this is Slashdot.


      Its also irrelevant for what his opinions are. He's not running for president.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    5. Re:Use your real name by chef_raekwon · · Score: 1

      both parental posts are correct -- the only game i play is Enemy Territory on Linux. And I WOULD GLADLY PAY MONEY* TO PLAY GAMES ON LINUX. I have given up all ties to the Windows world on my home PC.

      and if I had my way at work, I'd do the same.

      * this amount not to exceed 60$ Cdn.

      --
      We're like rats, in some experiment! -- George Costanza
    6. Re:Use your real name by AugstWest · · Score: 1

      Wasn't Half Life the first big game that required a unique key for each player that was submitted back to the mothership before allowing online play?

      Sounds like Activation to me.

    7. Re:Use your real name by Snaller · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Wasn't Half Life the first big game that required a unique key for each player that was submitted back to the mothership before allowing online play?

      Sounds like Activation to me.


      I haven't bought HalfLife ;-)

      But no, its not "real" Activation. real activation is where the program will not work at all (or only for a brief period) before you need to communicate with the mothership, and get authentication keys based on your hardware/software configuration.

      You can play single player HalfLife forever. You can play LAN games of HalfLife forever.

      I'm not sure you can play on the internet without your CD key being validated by WON servers though - this is borderline, but not quite as bad since its just a key you got when you bought the CD(and not something calculated based on the system set) - of course you have the problem if the servers go down, or gets taken down. As we can see now, they are changing to their new EvilWare system "Steam" and will remove the Won servers, at that point most people will be forced to use steam (or quite likely someone will hack the game so it can play without)

      ID as usual did it better, they had a CD key as well, but if the game was unable to authenticate with the server it would still allow you to play (presumably there was some other penalty, such as you couldn't join some servers who insisted on a validated id)

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    8. Re:Use your real name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd have paid $50 for Enemy Territory. It's a very well done game.

    9. Re:Use your real name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The enemy is weak!

    10. Re:Use your real name by Jonner · · Score: 1

      You're right that Half Life's key is not activation. I've installed it many times on Win98, Win2K, WineX, and Wine and it's seldom caused any trouble. It seems to exist for the purpose of uniquely identifying each player (which makes me a little uneasy, but it's reasonable if it can be used to stop cheaters) and making sure that each sold copy is only running one instance at a time.

    11. Re:Use your real name by Gillies · · Score: 0

      Amen brother

    12. Re:Use your real name by Namaseit · · Score: 1

      savage is for linux too. good game

      --
      75% of all statistics are made up!
    13. Re:Use your real name by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      FWIW with Half-Life, if you connected to a server which was firewalled from WON, then you weren't required to have a (valid) key yourself. Basically what it ends up coming down to is you have to buy the game to connect to the big sponsored servers.

      NWN uses exactly the same tactic, so it seems it's becoming popular.

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
    14. Re:Use your real name by Scooter · · Score: 1

      Geez, as a Quake player I always regarded Half Speed as being a bit slow - but now it's powered by Steam?! Blimey: Quiet Life Camperstrike 2 - here we come... Ready, set, hide!!

    15. Re:Use your real name by F34nor · · Score: 1

      I am willing to pay for well writen software. I'm willing to activate well writen software. I'm willing to use a donlge for well writen software. Hell I'm even willing to provide a blood sample for a company the puts its blood into their work. All M$ is getting from me is a feces sample, becasue that's what they put in theri software.

    16. Re:Use your real name by Snaller · · Score: 1

      Really? I didn't know that, i though it only worked that way for LAN servers.

      And i don't mind (much) buying a good game, though most are milking the copyright concept with too high prices, but what i do object to is this big brother attitude some seem to be taking.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  112. Wha, wha wha by Helvidius · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Let's face it: Microsoft Windows has 95% of the desktop market. Linux has 2% and that is splintered amongst various distributions. It makes logical sense for a company to code their software to the operating system that is most popular and (until kernel 2.6) handles multimedia best. Get over it.

    --
    "Care about people's opinions and you will be their prisoner." ~~Tao Te Ching~~
  113. DirectX-bound or 3D accelerated ATI drivers ? by Thanatiel · · Score: 1

    They could be waiting for anything :

    _ They could just be so thightly bound to DirectX that a port to an OpenGL based engine would be a lot of effort for a small amount of clients.

    _ Or they could be waiting for proper 3D acceleration for high-end ATI cards under Linux.

    My last computer have an ATI 9800 pro and I just can't use 3D acceleration. (I curse ATI every night for that)

    Those are two good reasons IMHO.

    I can't even use disks without suffering random crashes mind you : I have a pure SATA-150 system. I've tried all the workaround availables, none is working stable.

    Up to this one, every computer I own are running Linux 90% of the time. (All my older AMD/nVidia based computers are working fine)

    My best and most expensive computer can't be used as a Linux gaming machine.

    --
    Irrelevant news and morons using moderation to mod down what they disagree on. 2018 resolution: so long.
  114. booo hoooo. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    who cares?

  115. Why not solve portability the old-fashioned way ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    instead of developing a game for one OS and than having it to port to others (if ever), why not just develop it and supply it with its own boot-up (mini) OS.

    What would be the pro's & con's (both from a company and a user's perspective) to integrating a game with, say a stripped xNoppix distro ?

    It would be like turning your PC into a console: put game cd in, reboot equals start game, end game equals second reboot.

  116. we need open source games like that by penguin7of9 · · Score: 1

    I think the solution to getting something like Half Life 2 on Linux is to create open source versions of similar games.

    Given the amount of effort that has gone into HL2, it may sound naive to propose that. But a lot of the work in HL2 is the result of pushing the limits of current technology. If you take something like Quake or Quake 2, there is probably far more free game content out there than there was available commercially with the original games, and there are open source renderers with comparable quality (and distinct from the open source releases of the original game engines). Contrary to what people claim, there are a lot of people outside the industry who create 3D models, art, sound, music for fun, not profit.

    Companies are good at pushing the limits in areas like gaming; for that, they earn a lot of money, and for that they have to put in a lot of messy, unpleasant work (like dealing with DirectX). Open source then is the market mechanism by which those technologies then come down in price until they are free. If you absolutely must have the latest and greatest right now, then buy the commercial stuff. If you just want good games, wait a few years until similar open source Linux games come out.

    1. Re:we need open source games like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why yes, it sounds unbelivably naive! Still, I'm sure you've started your Sourceforge project already. I can imagine it now - a big want ad for Program Managers, Artists, 3D Specialists, Sound Specialists, Marketing, QA, a CEO, some IT guys, someone to make the coffee and of course you - lead programmer, though you've never even released shareware.

      There are no open source renderers with comparable quality to HL2. You see, people with talent tend to cash in on it. Even Stallman, with his slightly-above mediocre hackery manages to pull in all kinds of government grants - some business model! The truly successful sell what they produce and this has been the way of the world since history began to be recorded. Then they have money, for their families and themselves to survive, and they don't have to go do other things when they'd rather be doing games.

      "Unpleasant work (like dealing with DirectX)" is surprisingly agreeable when you begin to get results. You'll have to take my word for that as you'll obviously never know first hand, preferring to bleat about how great a "free" alternative could be... one day... if all the pathetic unemployables could all pull together. Well, Mr. doubly-gaily-named penguin7of9, you are all pulling together - right here on slashdot - it's called a circle jerk.

      Open source is the market mechanism by which fat, sweaty losers convince themselves that suicide can wait until tomorrow, perhaps there is hope. Well, it's a false hope. Your head is well and truly lodged in your anus and I advise you to leave it there until you suffocate.

    2. Re:we need open source games like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are no open source renderers with comparable quality to HL2.

      When Quake came out, there were "no open source renderers with comparable quality" either. Today, a few years later, there are.

      Open source is the market mechanism by which fat, sweaty losers convince themselves that suicide can wait until tomorrow, perhaps there is hope. Well, it's a false hope. Your head is well and truly lodged in your anus and I advise you to leave it there until you suffocate.

      Seems to me like you have psychological issues; maybe you should get some counseling.

    3. Re:we need open source games like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Err yes, today there are. Quite comparable to Quake. Vintage 1996. Mwahahaha!

    4. Re:we need open source games like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Err yes, today there are. Quite comparable to Quake. Vintage 1996.

      Yes, that's my point. And you'll be able to get something like HL2 in open source form in a few years as well. Most people can easily wait for a good game, difficult as that may be to believe for a teenager.

  117. It will depend on their architecture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just because HL2 *currently* only supports Direct3D doesn't mean that an OpenGL and Linux port couldn't be made. The ease of this port will depend on the architecture of the game - how well it's been designed.

    If it's been designed very well, a quick, rough first OpenGL implementation could only take a day. That was how quickly id Software got Quake 1 up and running under OpenGL when they first tried. It took a little while longer to do everything properly, optimise and make sure the game did everything properly for performance, but still.

    If there was an experienced developer at Valve who had Linux experience, was quite familiar with their own engine - and was sufficiently motivated - it wouldn't suprise me if there was a Linux client made available within a month or two of the game's Windows release. Probably not supporting the high-end rendering features that the DirectX version does, but you're going to have to turn all of those advanced features off anyway on lower-end Windows machines (I remember something about a GEForce 2 being the lowest-class hardware that they're supporting).

    So to anyone who says a Linux port is impossible because the Windows client is Direct 3D based - no, that's NOT impossible. It merely depends how much they want to keep ignoring Linux.

  118. Kiss future EpicGames Linux titles goodbye. by dnaumov · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Remember EpicGames? The folks who developed UT and UT2003. Well, you can now be sure we won't be seeing any more Linux titles from them. According to this article, EpicGames and Microsoft have just signed a multi-game publishing deal which would make the games PC/XBOX-exclusive and I really doubt MSFT would permit any kind of Linux support.

    1. Re:Kiss future EpicGames Linux titles goodbye. by vandenh · · Score: 2, Informative

      MS doesn't own Epic so I am sure they will still make server versions for Linux. Makes sense since a lot of sites are running the Linux server versions anyway. The deal is a publishing deal so that means that the client versions that MS will publish will be X/PC only.

  119. Linux Clients - Try Savage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll be playing Savage. :) Kudos to S2 for great linux client support in the same box and at the same time as windows.

  120. Mac version does not give you Linux by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

    Unix implies Mac OS X, but Mac OS X does not imply Unix.

    Targetting Mac OS X does not necessarily get you close to Linux. Most Mac OS X games use the Carbon API which is basically a modern version of the original Mac OS API. Most Mac developers prefer Carbon since it is a closer match to their existing code, libraries, and experience.

    Another Mac OS X API, and the one that is considered the native API, is Cocoa. It is basically an updated version of NextStep's API. Its also implemented in Objective-C.

    1. Re:Mac version does not give you Linux by Textbook+Error · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're quite correct in that stdout/stdin-style Unix apps can be ported to Mac OS X, but Mac OS X GUI-style apps can't be ported to other platforms (since most of the APIs they use - Carbon, Cocoa, Core Audio, HID, etc, aren't available).

      But I have to take issue with your "one that is considered the native API". This is complete tripe, and something that gets regurgitated by ex-NeXT executives at Apple that really should know better.

      Cocoa and Carbon are both equally "native" - they both sit on top of the lower-level APIs like Core Graphics/Core Foundation, and quite happily talk to each other (e.g., the Cocoa menu system used to call over to the Carbon Menu Manager - may still be the case). With 10.2 onwards you can place Carbon windows into a Cocoa app, and vice versa.

      The term "native" on the Mac means something quite specific - it was introduced for the 68K/PowerPC transition, as a way to distinguish between apps that used the native PPC ISA vs apps that were being run in the 68K emulator. The term was misappropriated when NeXT were purchased, as an attempt to paint older Mac APIs as somehow less worthy (thankfully most people at Apple have moved past this now, but it still gets trotted out once in a while).

      FWIW, 99% of the games ported to the Mac (i.e., ported by anyone other than the Omni folks, who are ex-NeXT developers) are written to Carbon. Cocoa is useful for putting UIs together quickly, but really doesn't buy you anything for a game (given that almost all of the Mac-specific code will be talking to C based APIs like OpenGL, HID, or the Sound Manager).

      --

      Nae bother
    2. Re:Mac version does not give you Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I have to take issue with your "one that is considered the native API". This is complete tripe, and something that gets regurgitated by ex-NeXT executives at Apple that really should know better.

      It is those executives at Apple who get to decide what the native API is, not you or I. My Mac programming experience is becoming somewhat dated since I still use a Mac OS 9 system but I believe there are some features that are only available when using Cocoa. If not now this will surely become the case since Apple bills Carbon merely as something to make the transistion from 9 to X easier.

    3. Re:Mac version does not give you Linux by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

      It is those executives at Apple who get to decide what the native API is, not you or I. My Mac programming experience is becoming somewhat dated since I still use a Mac OS 9 system but I believe there are some features that are only available when using Cocoa. If not now this will surely become the case since Apple bills Carbon merely as something to make the transistion from 9 to X easier.

    4. Re:Mac version does not give you Linux by Textbook+Error · · Score: 1

      It is those executives at Apple who get to decide what the native API is, not you or I.

      If "native" is just a synonym for "Cocoa", sure, call it what you like. If "native" is meant to imply there's some kind of performance or memory penalty for other APIs, I'm afraid not.

      My Mac programming experience is becoming somewhat dated since I still use a Mac OS 9 system but I believe there are some features that are only available when using Cocoa. If not now this will surely become the case since Apple bills Carbon merely as something to make the transistion from 9 to X easier.

      Your Mac programming experience is pretty dated - the line you're taking here is what Apple first pushed for Rhapsody, which was basically NeXT-on-PowerPC. This was a monumental flop in trying to win Mac developer mindshare, which was the reason for Carbon. The fact is that Carbon is around for the duration, and isn't a "transitional API". If you've been to any of the WWDCs in the last couple of years, you have seen there's a phenomenal amount of stuff being added to Carbon (Carbon Events, HIObject, HIView, drawers, sheets, services, etc) and to APIs that can be used from any app framework (Quartz, CFNetwork, Keychain, etc).

      The message for the last couple of years has been pretty consistent: use whatever app framework you like, and if you find something that's possible in one that's not possible in the other - log a bug.

      --

      Nae bother
    5. Re:Mac version does not give you Linux by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1

      The fact is that Carbon is around for the duration, and isn't a "transitional API".Which, as a lover of Objective-C and GNUstep, really pisses me off. We could have had EASY source-level compatibility if they hadn't started pushing all that Carbon/CF shit. Now, every time somebody comes along and asks how they can write software to compile on both GNUstep and OS X, they find out they can't use some hacked up Mac crap and say, "Oh. Never mind then." The ex-NeXT people at Apple gave up and we lost a great API and OO language *again*.

    6. Re:Mac version does not give you Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, every time somebody comes along and asks how they can write software to compile on both GNUstep and OS X

      Hmm, what a trade-off... Should I, as a huge multinational computer company, make half a dozen open-source people feel good about themselves - or do something that means the software that sells the boxes that I actually make my money on has a future?

      Decisions, decisions...

  121. If only... by Natalie's+Hot+Grits · · Score: 1

    Your monther bought Geforce FX video cards and 3D FPS video games the day they came out....

    oops, then she wouldn't be able to run linux..

    Your story makes no difference. Gaming will not come to linux with more users, because gaming must exist on linux before people can switch to gaming on linux. nVidia and ATI drove the nail in Linux's 3D coffin a good long while ago.

    my 2 cents.

    --
    Two infinite things: your stupidity and mine. But I'm not sure about the latter. If my sig offends you, I'm sorry.
    1. Re:If only... by EpsCylonB · · Score: 1

      Your story makes no difference. Gaming will not come to linux with more users, because gaming must exist on linux before people can switch to gaming on linux. nVidia and ATI drove the nail in Linux's 3D coffin a good long while ago.

      Nvidia is getting very good in terms of linux support, considering their Unified Driver Structure I don't see how things can get worse. Hopefully some time in the future we will have up to date linux drivers released with the windows ones. This really isn't as unlikely as you might think.

  122. Linux gamer, eh? You forgot Savage. by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    First of all, you forgot SAVAGE . A reference grade quality, high end Action FPS / Large Multiplayer RTS with state-of-the-art grafics, dripping with eye-candy. And they are the _very__first_ to come out with a client for Linux from the get go whilst officially making that their policy.
    So right away, go and buy that game and mail them how much you appriechiate them making a Linux game and how much you love to give them your money for it! They've even got a download purchase, so you can be playing in something like 20 minutes.
    Second of all: The transgaming people are heroes, no doubt, but something like 1 out of 30 mentionable games actually run. I won't buy any windowsgames any more, even *if* they are supported by tg and those where the first and last 30 bucks tg got from me. Sorry guys, Master of Orion 2 runs quite ok (the first 15 min.) but that's about it. No, really, it's better we rid this shoddy emulation stuff sooner than later and pay developers for making cool native Linuxgames. Whe can use them to await the time when Linux has conquered the desktop and gaming developement kicks in.
    Remember the Amiga days? Would've you thought that PCs would once be a gaming plattform? Me neither.

    Bottom line:
    Quit whining. And if you're bored help the Boson team finish their promising project.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Linux gamer, eh? You forgot Savage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope this comment will get modded up. Savage is a fantastic game and the retail cd comes with a linux installer on it. Out of the box, it simply works for Linux users. The game has fantastic graphics and groundbreaking gameplay. It deserves a slashdot article of it's own.

      * and please save your obligatory comments about a coward like me asking something of slashdot. *

  123. sure the only viable option for linux users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is to get the xbox version...

  124. Vice City by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have vice city installed in Gentoo and Win XP. The game is much quicker under Linux (feels like double the frame rate) although I suspect this might be something to do with anti-aliasing or other settings. One thing's for sure, the linux version keeps running without slowdowns, whereas the XP one takes a coffee break now and then when some vital process takes over in the background (reporting my installed apps to MS, checking for patch o' the day, downloading NAV filters, etc etc)

    Cheers
    Simon

  125. It's not so much that linux geeks don't buy... by thracky · · Score: 1

    Really, any true linux gamer jumps at the chance to buy any half decent game when it either supports linux through downloads such as Neverwinter Nights, or supports linux right off the cd. But how many true linux gamers are there due to the fact that so few games are actually available for it?

    I remember after I bought Neverwinter Nights (about 2 days after its release) there was talk about the upcoming linux client, and although there was a bit of excitement and apparently a lot of forum posts from the linux users, when you look at it realistically, these users were simply a tiny percentage of the population who purchased or planned to purchase Neverwinter Nights.

    Unfortunately, linux supporters who are also extremely avid gamers don't have much choice when it comes to a gaming platform. If I ran linux on my gaming machine, I simply would not have the wide variety and choice of games that I do when I run windows, and yes, people crave choice. I personally don't want to be stuck playing the same 2 or 3 FPS games when I also enjoy racing games and sports games. I have yet to see a retail port of *any* big title racing or sports game for linux.

    Why don't developers/publishers spend money on developing linux versions? Because there simply are not enough users to make it worthwhile. And that is the unfortunate truth when cost > benefit, however I don't see this as a "linux users don't have the money or aren't willing to spend it" kind of issue. If linux was a truly viable gaming platform (If games of all sorts were developed for it) I guarantee you more people would either run linux because they can play the games they purchased on it, or the linux guys would buy the games because they now have an option.

  126. Don't run servers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just don't run any linux servers, until you get a linux client. And if you manage a network, and feel a little BOFH-like, don't allow any HL2 traffic through that linux NAT either.

  127. wine friendly ? is it so hard? by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    Why cant companies if its so hard to make linux versions, just make a damn wine compatible version.

    Just make it basic, and openGL and of you go.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  128. Why should they write a Linux port ? by MarkTina · · Score: 1

    I know this sort of talk is likely to get me stalked but ... What possible reason would Valve have for releasing a Linux port of Half Life ? It'll get bugger all sales. Face it if you walked down your street and knocked on all the doors how many of the people there would be running (and using, not just have it installed) Linux ? Eff all in the scheme of things! So why then should Valve employ a bunch of horribly expensive developers to make a Linux port with no visible returns in sight ? Face it Linux people, Linux is very good at some things (server stuff, though I'm not keen on it being in important/sensitive datacenters) but impracticale for others. I always find it interesting that the minority groups are the loudest whingers ... you should here some Amigans ;-) Now if you'll exscuse me I'll jet find my asbestos undies ...

  129. You must sign this petition ! by Ploum · · Score: 1
    1. Re:You must sign this petition ! by shokk · · Score: 1

      Petition all you want. It'll fill up the time that you're not playing HL2

      WHILE I AM!!!!

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
  130. Re:hardly a suprise... considering nerve's heritag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A Playstation 2 port has been anounced.

    "September 02, 2003 - During ECTS last week, Valve's director of marketing Doug Lombardi confirmed that Half-Life 2 would be making its way to the PlayStation 2 sometime in the future."

    http://ps2.ign.com/articles/436/436323p1.html?from int=1

    IMHO the same thing which happened to splinter cell, on the gamecube and PS2, will happen again.
    Bad ports, only to please some customers. The PS2 doesn't have the hardware for this game.

  131. cost is small, therefore do it. by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    on a budget of say, 5million, surely one linux programmer on 65k/year isnt going to kill the budget!

    plus you dont have a windows and linux versions, you have BOTH damn binaries on the same CD, unless your a clueless manager that has some anal marketing reason for it.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
    1. Re:cost is small, therefore do it. by RupW · · Score: 1

      plus you dont have a windows and linux versions, you have BOTH damn binaries on the same CD, unless your a clueless manager that has some anal marketing reason for it.

      e.g. you'd have to slip the product launch date because you really needed more than one Linux guy? That's a huge deal.

  132. The answer describes the problem by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

    All ten of the lunix users that actually pay for games will whine for a bit, then buy it anyway and boot into the Windows install that they, you know, just keep around for games and stuff. Valve will see not one penny less at retail, and will save thousands in support costs.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  133. What about "not give a damn"? by GeekDork · · Score: 1

    Because that's what I'm gonna do. At the time I tried the original Halflife - in the early days of CounterStrike -, it already felt really old and wasn't so impressive. Unreal was out already so there was a clear winner in the "look and feel" department.

    Sure, HL2 seems to have snappy graphics, but apart from that it's gonna be plain ol'. The only thing I want to see is an end to Halflife mods! If I see one more damn 64x64 bitmap explosion and 3-polygon player models, I'm gonna throw up all over the screen it's on.

    --

    Fight hunger. Filet a politician and send him to a 3rd world country of your choice.

  134. I found a Half-Life 2 security hole! by Tei · · Score: 0

    Actually HL2 will use InternetExplorer to render the MOTD, will be with "active-x" and "scripting" disabled, but you know... thats with IE is a joke.

    All Steam powered games will be easyly tracked with this and bug images, will be easy to place track coockies in the client, etc...

    On-Topic:

    I dont think all the Game developping is trow away OpenGL technology, but is OpenGL is slowly diing. I think Valve is killing anithing but Microsoft technology. The fact that Half-Life1 run as OpenGL Its because is Quake1 based, but a theorical Half-Life1 not Quake1 based will be no-opengl. I dont think Valve like OpenGL or standards, I think Valve like Microsoft *Closed* technology.

    This is critical, because OpenGL 2.0 maybe will not change this. And all people want to continue playing Valve games, because where fun, but is code is CRAP. Look at Steam, the more crappy tool never seems, more bugs than line of code. But is a nice idea :D

    --

    -Woof woof woof!

  135. It al boils down to this by tarkin · · Score: 1

    As a developer I use a platform I think is stable, robust,opensource,... but fun at the same time.
    Hence Linux,Mac OS X,...

    As an avid gamer I buy the games that I would like to play, and unfortunately run them on a platform that enables me to play those games as easy and as fast as possible.
    Hence Microsoft Windows.

    I hate, dispise windows from top to bottom, but when I'm gaming I can suppress that hate or at least channel it at the next Cacodemon I face ;-)

    I am a full-time Mac OS X user, but will never buy a Powermac for gaming because I will have a slow gaming system and have to wait untill all the games get ported.
    If I ever get the urge to run an Gamecube game that's not available on a PC game I would buy one, maybe even an Xbox if they invent a game good enough for which I would sell me soul to Satan ;)

    I really hope all this changes and that every game resembles Warcraft3 (simul. Mac + Win) and/or UT2003 etc, but untill then I'll play the games on Windows

    I love gaming too much to let my geek OS preference get in the way of that!!

    --
    blaah !
  136. Re:What?! HL2 won't run on my toaster with netbsd? by Izeickl · · Score: 1

    I agree, after all most Linux people seem to go on about CHOICE, dont get upset if someone doesnt choose the same as you! Get your army of linux coders and start another Source Forge project then maybe in 5 years you will have another Tux Racer!!

  137. STOP THE INSANITY! by hangingonwords · · Score: 0

    i don't get what the big problem is. fact of the matter is linux sucks if your a gamer and until someone changes that why doesn't everyone just stop whining. repartition, linux on one, windows 98se on the other, read slashdot on one, play games on the other... i don't see what the big problem is here... frankly, if it doesn't run linux and you're not willing to run windows too then stop the bitching.

    and just to get this out of the way: i only say win98se because frankly i like to have that DOS support too. there are a lot of DOS games i loved and still like to play so why not just use the real thing.

    it's just my opinion and it's very ON-topic. damn moderators have gone mad and it's affected me. just keepin' it real, yo...

    --
    fact: microsoft > linux
  138. No support to us = No support from us by Felinoid · · Score: 1

    It's very hard to get Linux games on the shelfs so companys will try to snub Linux.

    The companys who have supported Linux in the past enjoyed support from Linux users and what that means is that Linux many Linux users use Linux as a sort of personal server running personal websites, e-mail and other services from the system.

    I've noticed the vast majority of game servers seam to be running on Linux. This becouse Linux makes a very good server and there are game clients for Linux. BSD and Solarus might make better servers but with no clients BSD and Solarus users just don't feel then need to support the games they themselfs can not play.

    Linux users MAY chouse to reboot to Windows but those users will not be running game servers as they'll be taking those servers down to play. There just isn't any point to having a server if you can't play on it.

    --
    I don't actually exist.
  139. Remember tuxgames.com? by Sevn · · Score: 1

    Remember transgaming? Oh, that's right. They are STILL IN BUSINESS. And they sell LINUX GAMES! AMAZING! So it appears that geeks are talking the talk and walking the walk! And by golly, there IS A MARKET FOR LINUX GAMES! Ok, toasted that point. What's left....

    Valve simply auctioned off access to their title to the highest bidder. They didn't read anything. If redhat had approached them with a huge bundle of cash, they would have put a friggin' penguin in the game. Valve simply doesn't care about linux, accept to run dedicated servers for their products. Unlike say, ID which does the Linux port for "practice". Carmac's words, not mine. Of course, Valve doesn't have a Carmac. Valve doesn't even have half a Carmac. They have a Gabe Newell and it remains to be seen what that's worth. This is their first graphics engine that is all their own. Valve does not have a stunning track record in regards to releasing rock solid code. They've also been known to outright lie their asses off about problems with their games blaming problems on drivers and hardware in the past only to fix the problems silently later with a patch. It's because of that attitude of theirs that I don't have very high hopes for HL2. Valve has repeatedly whined about graphics cards and drivers since the dawn of time when people get pissed about broken stuff. Where as a professional company doesn't whine and bends over backwards fixing problems instead of pointing fingers.

    --
    For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    1. Re:Remember tuxgames.com? by another_mr_lizard · · Score: 1

      In case you hadnt noticed there is a total of 5 pieces of gaming software that can be purchased from the transgaming store.

      Transgaming's main business is WineX - a piece of software that allows some Windows binaries to run under linux - this is entirely different from Loki who ported games to Linux.

      I currently have a transgaming subscription and while it is very nice to play a handful of games properly under linux there still isnt enough supported games to get rid of my Windows partition.

      --
      "My parents were strict, but they never pitted me against livestock" - Doug Stanhope
    2. Re:Remember tuxgames.com? by sql*kitten · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They didn't read anything. If redhat had approached them with a huge bundle of cash, they would have put a friggin' penguin in the game. Valve simply doesn't care about linux, accept to run dedicated servers for their products.

      This may be hard for you to understand, but outside of the "geeks" no-one cares about Linux except as a way to make money.

      And get this: even Red Hat doesn't. They're a corporation just like Valve.

    3. Re:Remember tuxgames.com? by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      Unlike say, ID which does the Linux port for "practice". Carmac's words, not mine. Of course, Valve doesn't have a Carmac.

      BUT, Carmac developes on Unix, so in effect the Windows version is a port too.

      I agree with all your points, and I think Carmac's developement method simply underscores points made by others in this thread: 1) Porting is easy if you plan it from the get-go, and 2) it's a lot easier to develope for *nix and port to Windows that vice-versa.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    4. Re:Remember tuxgames.com? by Sevn · · Score: 1

      And save money. Because the total cost of ownership is less for certain applications. Things that make and save money tend to get adopted. Governments are moving too it. People are learning about it. Inroads to the desktop are established. Why are you afraid of Linux? Every day more people "care" about it. You are so biased it's amusing so I'm going to add you to my friends list. Seeing as you are an sql type person I'm sure you know that Oracle is pretty much pushing RedHat + Oracle9i as it's premier solution for small to midsized businesses. Might not be a bad idea to learn it? Check out the big penguin on the cover of the July/August Oracle magazine. Read the incredible articles where Oracle explains how much better it is and how they are switching a large majority of their desktops to it. Do some googling and read about how Ernie Ball has completely adopted it. It's coming whether you like it or not. :)

      --
      For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    5. Re:Remember tuxgames.com? by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      Seeing as you are an sql type person I'm sure you know that Oracle is pretty much pushing RedHat + Oracle9i as it's premier solution for small to midsized businesses. Might not be a bad idea to learn it?

      *grin* The first time I deployed Linux in a commercial setting was in... '96. I'm quite familiar with its strengths and weaknesses. I consider myself to be an engineer, not a partisan, and I always pick their right tool for the job without letting my personal opinions get in the way. In the games market, the odds are heavily stacked against Linux: it doesn't have the hardware support that Windows does, it's a much, much smaller fraction of the market than Windows, it has a "something for nothing" culture associated with it (rightly or wrongly), etc etc. As I said in another post, Linux might make a fine console OS, but Linux on PC is not a good gaming platform.

      I wouldn't read too much into Oracle's current infatution with Red Hat - remember their Raw Iron project? Exactly.

    6. Re:Remember tuxgames.com? by Sevn · · Score: 1

      Ok, you get geek points.

      Fair enough. From 92-96 I was supporting SunOS for US DoD and pushing BSD on people. :) For the most part I'm a shamless zealot of one thing or another from time to time. In a commercial setting, I do what's best for the customer. I've deployed NT 3.51, 4.0, in the past and Win2k recently in a very small office. I recommended and installed Digital UNIX(before Tru64) at Mindspring before the Earthlink "merger of equals" and I primarily concentrate on setting up sometimes very small and sometimes utterly enormous commercial webhosting solutions with varying degrees of complexity depending on what my clients want and can afford. Lately that has been FreeBSD and Gentoo installed on 1U's or Poweredges. I'd agree that Linux has odds stacked against it in the gaming market now, but I see it making a dent in the desktop market within the next few years and that situation possibly turning around. I can dream. It's complete laziness on my part. I'd rather not have to deal with dual booting or keeping a separate windows box to play games. Good thing I prefer FPS games because you can be in and out in 10-15 minutes with no overwhelming commitment. Plenty of FPS titles for Linux. The NVidia support is as good as the windows support, and the ATI support is most of the way there and improving. With Linux, it's a "something for hard work and reading documents to set your stuff up" culture. There is nothing wrong with a free OS. Too many people are of the opinion that commercial solutions are always better and that is simply not the case. Apache really has no competition. Sendmail does, but it's all other free software. Same deal with bind. I don't think those products are used the most because of a "something for nothing" culture. It's a quality culture. There are plenty of open source alternatives that are simply better in most ways than some alternative you'd have to pay for. Take Linux for example....

      As for oracle, I dunno. Larry is getting older and probably won't pull one of his "crazy ivans" again for a good long time if ever again. He appears to be backing a winning horse at the moment and making a killing doing it. I'd call it an infatuation if it wasn't for the fact that they have replaced a majority of their desktops with it and they have signed partnership agreements with RedHat and HP. That and they already have machines running Linux and Oracle9i in place with american air traffic control and quite a few hospitals. US Govt is dog slow to change platforms, and even slower at considering any changes. I'm sure they have some sort of ridiculously long support contract arranged. I have a few friends that are still busy replacing DOS 6.22/novell machines at the pentagon with Win2k.

      The Oracle article gives the impression this is something they'll be doing for the long haul. You should check it out (the article). That and Larry gets a sick twisted thrill out of snubbing B.Gates. He has never had an opportunity quite like this one to do exactly that. IBM hasn't either. IBM is out for blood though. I see things becoming very interesting in the next 5 years for Microsoft. In the end, the consumer should win no matter what the outcome.

      --
      For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    7. Re:Remember tuxgames.com? by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      As for oracle, I dunno. Larry is getting older and probably won't pull one of his "crazy ivans" again for a good long time if ever again. He appears to be backing a winning horse at the moment and making a killing doing it. I'd call it an infatuation if it wasn't for the fact that they have replaced a majority of their desktops with it and they have signed partnership agreements with RedHat and HP.

      I have customers who have been running Oracle 10g betas for months now. It's a slick product, and the arguments for blade/grid/thin client are compelling in theory...

      But (and this is a big butt, like J-Lo's) to truly benefit from grids requires a complete overhaul of IT infrastructure. Back in the day host-based systems were all the rage, then client-server, then middleware - grid architecture requires that the assumptions of the past 3 generations be discarded. If I were building a network and applications from scratch, I'd definitely go down the grid route - but people aren't, they have a hell of a lot of the previous 3 generations still around. Try to mix modern grid apps with thick client/server, and you open a whole big can of worms. It requires enormously detailed planning, and a deep understanding of the applications and the business - you need to know before you start what resources can be pooled from where at what times, for example, and if you get it wrong, you can bring the business grinding to a halt. The jump from 9i to 10g is as big as the jump from 7.3 to 8i, if not bigger. And another thing I've found: blades save space and are easy to manage (if you have good tools) but in terms of compute power per dollar, 1U's still come out ahead, by a long way. And even if you deploy blades, you still need something on the back end to handle storage - it's often the right economic choice just to buy a big Sun and use it for both compute and storage.

      What I'm saying is, migrating to grids requires a lot of upfront spending. Those who master or manufacture the tech will be very well paid in the next IT boom. Those who roll out 10g as if it's just another patch are completely missing the point. And the blade scene - right now - is full of hype, and people need to take a good hard look before they commit to it.

  140. Can't over appreciate the indep stance of ID. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whatever their reasons are. We know that Microsoft pays money to lock out competitors, so in the case of Valve I'm pretty sure they will or did get benefits if they provide a Windows version only. Which maybe makes the economical reasoning kind of redundant, at least short term. And I'm pretty sure ID could make quite some money more if they did like MS would have it (Xbox?), especially since I suspect they haven't actually *sold* too many Linux copies of their games. Regarding me, in my house Windows hasn't seen itself booting for some three years now, and HL2 won't change this sensible habit. Another sensible habit btw being to actually *buy* my ID games.

  141. thats not right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    loki went under not for the lack of cash, but due to really bad management. yet yerself informed before spreading FUD.

    1. Re:thats not right by black+mariah · · Score: 1

      Read some of the articles posted here. Get yourself informed.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
  142. Mods on acid... by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

    Whoever modded the parent as Informative should be #;#;#;#;#;#;#;#;.

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  143. Don't worry about it.. by Deal-a-Neil · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    .. by the time they release it in 2015, you'll be able to ALT-TAB between Linux Kernel 7.7.15 and Windows 2010 Advanced Server (the last version of MS-Win Server released after they decide to get out of the server market in Q4-2009).

    First, there was vaporware. Now, there are vaporworries.

    1. Re:Don't worry about it.. by Deal-a-Neil · · Score: 1

      Off topic? You clod. You just don't get it -- Half-Life 2 has been talked about forever.. they'll never release it, was my point. Who in the hell is moderating this anyway? I'm funny, damn it. Now laugh. That's better.

  144. Re:I won't be buying it -- Won't help Linux by Mr_Silver · · Score: 1
    Then I realized I was wasting my time for an ideal. I did this same thing all day at work on Linux servers. And when I got home the last thing I wanted to do was tweak my OS just so I could play a couple games with my friends.

    Oh my god. Finally I've found someone on Slashdot that appreciated that the OS is a tool to help them get things done and that "things" is not tinkering with the OS to allow them to do other things that can't be done without the first "things" being done.

    You head directly to my friends list :o)

    --
    Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
  145. Timing by dmaxwell · · Score: 1

    Selling a game for $40 that Windows users can grab out of a bargain bin for $10 won't work and it has nothing to do with how supposedly cheap Linux users are. With that kind of price differential, I'd check out how well it works in Wine.

    If Loki had way to be in on the process from the beginning and get Linux ports out no more than a month or two after the Windows debut then that is something else. I did pick up the QIII tin box. That came out when the Windows stuff did and was no more expensive.

  146. Oh, what to do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >
    Linux gaming community react to the release of Half-Life 2? Boot into Windows? Wait for WINE or WineX support? Get the Xbox version?
    >
    >
    Buy Final Fantasy X-2 for the PS2.

    PC Gamers are *SO LAME*.....

  147. You're going to need a new PC to play it anyway... by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

    Since you'll already need a new PC to play the thing, where's the loss? You'll be booted into windows on one, and linux on another- just don't use the windows one for anything else, and you'll be fine.

    --
    -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
  148. Future game hacks may stop WINE support by fluor2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Cheats in gaming has becomed an increased problem in some on-line games.

    Since WINE sports Hardware acceleration, future game hacks (e.g. a program that aims for you, and other cheats) that are developed to run and hack through WINE, might be undetectable for the Windows anti-cheat program. Thus, it might be that the Anti-Cheat will block any WINE.

    I've allready seen cheats that is undetectable through WINE in Half-Life Counter-Strike, and my guess it's only a matter of time before WINE is getting blocked, unless a anti-cheat client from within Linux is written.

  149. Console Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is why I have a Gamecube. My gaming machine is for gaming. I buy a game for it, that's written for it's hardware, put it in, and play it. I don't have to worry about if my drivers are as good as some other OS's drivers, or if my video card is new enough to run the game, or feel bad because I have to play the game on Windows even though all I use is Linux.

    My computers are for email, the web, programming, etc. My gamecube is for game playing. Problem solved.

  150. Dual Booting is Annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Guess I'll keep playing Heavy Gear II, same as I kept playing Quake when I was on OS/2. If I can't have it conveniently in the delivery vehicle I want, I'll pass.

    RIAA, are you listening?

  151. Um ok Linux clients are good but Consoles!? by yoshi_mon · · Score: 1

    I actually broke a /. trend and went and RTA before posting here.

    Now I can understand the *nix gamers lament. I've considered switching my main desktops over to linux for many reasons that we all know and have disussed here for years now. I still have not and yeah, it's mostly because of the games.

    And yeah oh no I must not be a real Linux/GNU/OSS person because there are games for linux! Well yeah, duh, but to be quite frank they are not even in the same league with the sheer number of games that you can play on a Win32 boxen, let alone if you want to, gasp, pick what you can play.

    But back to my point, this guy says he wants games on his *nix boxen but instead he just figures that buying a console is going to be better!? Excuse me? An XBox no less?!

    I'm sorry, but this just set of my BS meter over the top. Yeah, consoles are gaming platforms and for people that use them it's cool. But are they any better than using a proprietary OS? And on top of that a proprietary console from MS?

    I'm sorry, the whole artical is -1 Flamebait.

    --

    Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
  152. Start coding it... by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

    You want a Half-Life 2 Linux client?

    Set up a closed room and start reverse-engineering a port of it the day it comes out. Start up a project on SourceForge called OpenHalfLife2 and quit yer whining.

    Half the fun is in specing out the project anyway.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  153. Here we go again. by wowbagger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OK, folks, here we go again.

    Go back and look over this story. There, one before, we had a story on Slashdot about a software vendor not supporting Linux. At that time, I made a very reasonable suggestion - write to the company involved and ask for a Linux port. I also asked folks who had done so to comment in my Journal, so as to have a public record of the number of letters so written so that when the company involved said "We've never had any requests for this" we could trivially disprove the claim.

    And what came of it? Nothing. cat /dev/null.

    Why did Valve release a Linux server for Halflife? Because the community innundated them with requests for it.

    So you want a HalfLife2 for Linux? Innundate Valve with requests! Stop bitching on Slashdot, and write them a physical, paper and toner letter requesting a HalfLife2 client for Linux.

    Now, as for the whole "Just suck it up and run Windows" crowd, and the whole "Fuck Windows - Linux or Nothing" crowd: Each of us must make a decision what is more important - running the OS we choose, or playing a game. And you know what? That decision is going to be different for different people - imagine that!

    If you are willing to put up with Windows to be able to run Halflife 2, then by all means do so, have fun, and SHUT THE FUCK UP!

    If you will 'live free or die', and refuse to run Windows in order to run Halflife 2, then great! Welcome to the fold, accept the consequences of your decision, and SHUT THE FUCK UP (on Slashdot, that is)! Bitching on Slashdot won't change things, writing a letter to Valve just might!

    Or if you don't want to write Valve, then help out on the Wine DirectX layer (and yes, I actually DO have contributions in the Wine source tree.)

    But whatever your choices are, accept that they come with consequences, and STOP BITCHING ABOUT THEM WHERE IT WILL DO NO GOOD!

    1. Re:Here we go again. by jaysones · · Score: 1

      And to save you some time, here's their address-

      Valve Software
      PO Box 1688
      Bellevue, WA 98009

      or fax them at (425) 827-4843

    2. Re:Here we go again. by ReNeGaDe75 · · Score: 1

      Too bad I already posted on this thread. I want to mod this one up.

      I whole-heartedly agree. Many Linux-freaks bitch and moan 24x7 about how they hate Windows because all the games run on it and Microsoft monopolized it, yadda yadda.

      Yes, Microsoft monopolized the software industry. But the only power they have is what you give them. Valve only writes for Windows because "everybody uses Windows" (or so they think). If everybody contacts Valve expressing interest in a Linux port, they'll realize there is actually a profit, and they will port. Microsoft will lose their monopoly when the people take it away from them by seeking other products.

      --
      Hypocrisy is the 8th deadly sin.
  154. If your serious, Don't Play It !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    If you're serious about wanting the client for Linux , don't play it on Windows. I'd love to see it for OSX, which probably won't happen until the game is stale anyway. If I buy HalfLife to play it on PC I'm saying, "I don't mind that your're developing MS-Only software. You'll get my money anyway."

    ($.02)

  155. so about wine.. by noyren · · Score: 1

    WineX and wine atm emulates directx, anyone know why they don't work on lower level api calls instead, so you could download and install MS-DX instead of half coded emulated dx?

    I searched on it and came up with this thread:
    http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-devel/2003/08 /0578.html
    while I don't have the skills or time to start doing that myself, SOMEONE, get it done :p

  156. You must get a life! by NineNine · · Score: 1

    No really. Get a life.

  157. wrong url by noyren · · Score: 1

    remove the ' ' in between 08 and /, no idea why that's added, but I can't seem to post without that showing up..

  158. HL2 has an Interesting price model by Idimmu+Xul · · Score: 4, Informative

    From http://www.blame-the-french.com/portal.php?article =0&sid=c6d361f221e8bb6e95ac4b053c4928de

    Email and reply from some bloke and the HL2 pr bloke, Gabe.

    --

    Gabe Gabe Gabe!!!

    As I'm sure you are aware the HL2 community is going crazy with the rumour that HL2 is going to be like a MMORPG and you will have to pay a fee each month via Steam to play HL2 multiplayer.

    I don't believe this to be true but can you please put it to rest once and for all. PLEEEEEEASE.

    Kind Regards

    Matt

    Here's my current thinking: Some people want to buy Half-Life 2 in a store. Right now we have three SKUs planned at three price points. One will have single-player only and not play MODs and we think of that as the mass market SKU (sold mainly at the Costcos and Walmarts of the world). The second is our traditional single-player plus multiplayer SKU that runs MODs and is sold at places like EBX. The third is the collector's edition SKU with lots of cool bonus stuff for people who like cool bonus stuff.

    In the Steam world, some people will want to buy it once, like the middle SKU above. Other people will want to buy the game on subscription (e.g. $9.95/month). The good news for the "buy it once" crowd is, well, they only have to pay once. The bad news is that when we come out with new content (expansion products, TF 2, and presumably other games) then they have to pay separately for those. We're pretty sure that the $9.95 guys are going to get the better value, as we've been pretty good over the years at generating a lot of content.

    Now nobody has done this before, so we're scratching our heads and massaging the plans to make sure we've got the best set of options. We've had some feedback that we should sell the top SKU (single-player only no MODs) on Steam, and my reaction has been "yeah, right, for the three people in the world who have a broadband connection, are sophisticated enough to purchase software over the Internet, but DON'T want to play MODs and multiplayer". Some people have said "I want a subscription, but I think the box and the manual are cool, so what about sending me those" and I think that's pretty interesting and we're trying to figure out what to do for them (needless to say Sierra isn't exactly jumping for joy at the idea of selling us boxes so people don't buy Half-Life 2 in stores).

    But nowhere has there been a suggestion that people pay in the store and then pay a monthly fee on top of that a la the MMORPG.

    Gabe

    --
    The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
    1. Re:HL2 has an Interesting price model by Awptimus+Prime · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "We're pretty sure that the $9.95 guys are going to get the better value, as we've been pretty good over the years at generating a lot of content."

      Yeah, uh, right. I recall the Half-life website going over 2 years without a single update. I downloaded Steam 2.0 and not a single feature has been added to any of the games in months and months.

      The Counter-Strike crew did most of their work before joining the ranks of Valve. The Half-life engine was riddled with hacks and cheats, which took months to get patched.

      My take on the Sierra/Valve thing is they had the right game at the right time. A good 32 player supporting engine that ran on your average machine of the day. TFC, even though it's graphics were bad compared to others, had great potential for people to actually work in teams. All this stuff was extrodinary at the time.

      Yes, Tribes2 looked nicer and was a more advanced game, but you need a serious machine to run it. What fun is multi-player when it's requirements are so demanding that only a very few people will be able to play?

      I guess what I am saying, in so many words, is.. Don't get too excited about a game that hasn't come out yet. The whole industry is geared around hype surrounding sequels. We, as the customers, fall for it every time. We get excited, hoping to re-live the excitement of what once was new. This hasn't been happening lately, as most studios are investing millions into making a game look pretty and have all the latest beats, but forget to make it fun.

      I'm just negative..

    2. Re:HL2 has an Interesting price model by symbolic · · Score: 1


      And, there's no reason that Valve can't pull a Sony and charge both the monthly fee and for any expansions/additions, as Sony is doing right now with Planetside.

    3. Re:HL2 has an Interesting price model by L7_ · · Score: 1

      Planetside is dead.

      Savage is the game to be playing.

    4. Re:HL2 has an Interesting price model by Awptimus+Prime · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's for sure.

      I was on the Planetside beta and really enjoyed it for a while. Once it went retail, all the fun was gone. I was paying $12.99 a month for a game that was updated less often than most mods, such as Desert Combat for the BF1942 engine. I recall two months of waiting for the promised new features, then they just added that anti-aircraft buggy and nerfed those dual cycler armor suits. Oh, and all the lag.. Jeez, it was not fun after a while.

      If they go with the monthly payment thing, it had better be $3-5/mo. This would make sense to pay for the bandwidth costs associated with Steam. It definitely would not be worth the $12.99/mo standard fee for MMORPG-types.

      If they do try to pull off turning it into a monthly payment cash generator, it'll hopefully hurt sales to the point they have to drop it.

      I'd rather buy a game, patch from my own sources, and not be bound in some contract and fork over money every month.

      For now, I'll keep playing Desert Combat. If anyone reading this has Battlefield 1942 and are bored with it, grab this mod from http://www.desertcombat.com .. It'll make things entertaining again.

    5. Re:HL2 has an Interesting price model by F34nor · · Score: 1

      Yeah, um right. How about... how long have I had halflife 2004-1999=5 5*12=60 60*9.95 a month?

      That means Half-Life would have cost me about $600! ...and people say the record companies are greedy...

      There has to be a price cap for this model or have it be $2 a month I have already bought Half-Life 3 times after roomates stole or "lost" or lent out my key. Fuc#3r5. So I'm already at about $150. Natural Selection was worth buying HL for the third time btw.

  159. What about the HL Linux community? by SQLz · · Score: 1

    I think one thing everyone is forgetting is that the HL Linux community is huge and has written probably millions of lines of code specifically to work with Half-Life. All this code has done nothing but keep HL1 alive, ever extending the life of the game.

    Check out Metamod, a server mod that allows you to load multiple server mods. All server add ons are pretty much based on Metamod. Here is the List of Plugins available for metamod.

    Then we have AdminMod, probably the most popular server mod adds all kinds of capability to the HL server, including MYSQL support. Not only that, it has a small interpreter built in and there are litterally hundreds of plugins available.

    There is also all the Anti-Cheat software, software written by someone else then 'acquired by UnitedAdmins' (inside joke), server log parsers in pretty much every language, server status tools, bots, map building tools for linux, the list goes on and on.

    The great thing about running a Half-Life server is that is really the BEST bar none game server software available. It makes Quake3 server and BF1942 look like Kommander Keen. Much of the functionally came from the Linux community. It was a 'symbiotic relationship' but I think Valve owes us a little more than a thanks.

  160. Is HL2 going to be on this "steam" shit as well? by Snaller · · Score: 1

    Valves new slowdown/bloatware system "Steam" ? They are going to chance over from the Won servers in a couple of weeks (alledgely)

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  161. Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you told your parents you're gay yet??

  162. Have you ever programmed? by wrinkledshirt · · Score: 1

    I don't mean to sound like I'm knocking you as being ignorant, but have you ever tried programming both a server ap and a 3d game ap for Linux?

    There's a huge difference between programming a server engine and programming a graphics engine. Linux is highly evolved when it comes to the former, but for the latter the tools are still in development. If they wanted to produce something that worked as well on Linux as it does on Microsoft, they'd probably need to spend most of their time developing the necessary drivers instead of actually programming the game. The cost of developing the engine versus developing artistic content might be minimal if developing for Microsoft, but it's not like all there is to it is a five-minute rewrite of the model->render(); method. Even the situation with NWN is instructive, in that there were all sorts of headaches just trying to get in-game movies to work, and those have nothing to do with the game engine per se.

    The fact that it's coming out on XBox doesn't mean anything more than they can program for two different Microsoft-dominated environments, and, considering the XBox's need for hot titles, they probably got a ton of help from MS to make it happen.

    Don't get me wrong. I love Linux. LOVE it. But there are times when that old cliche about using the right tool for the job applies, and it definitely applies in this case. Case in point: I developed a search engine for a message board database in under a couple of weeks for Linux. Despite missing some features, it positively smoked, and that was my first foray into socket programming. I tried making a tackle handball game for Linux, and after three weeks, it still looked like something worse than what the original Nintendo was offering.

    --

    --------
    Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...

  163. petition ......... by big-giant-head · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Look some companies have tried to sell linux games, but no one bought them! They sold a bunch of the windows version though. I like open source, alot, but open source folks have to realize that alot of companies make money from SELLING SOFTWARE! We can't have everything for free.

    Instead of signing a petition, wait till a company
    comes out with a linux game, and BUY it, buy 2 or 3 for your friends. Thats how we will get good games on linux.

    petition with your wallet...

    --

    So Long and Thanks for all the Fish.
    1. Re:petition ......... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buy every boxed linux game you see, in fact, even if you don't want to play it. Someone's gotta invest the money in to getting the retail figures up before anyone cares.

      But then again, it seems that no one cares because the above is necessary. That's a tough situation.

    2. Re:petition ......... by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1
      pardon?

      the ONLY reason I bought quake 2 and quake 3 unreal tournament and RTCW was because there was a linux version. I cannot be bothered to reconfigure my home main system (let alone shell out the cash for an OS I would ONLY use to play games with!) just so that I can play a game. Screw that. They don't support my platform, I certainly can't reasonably buy their software.

    3. Re:petition ......... by big-giant-head · · Score: 1

      You are in the miniority...... If more folks did what you do, we would have more games on linux...

      --

      So Long and Thanks for all the Fish.
    4. Re:petition ......... by Jonner · · Score: 1

      Speak for yourself. I bought the GNU/Linux version of Myth2 in the store when I could have bought both Myth and Myth2 for Windoze combined for less.

    5. Re:petition ......... by Zebbers · · Score: 1

      Ive purchased UT, Q3, NWN all because they run on linux.. Thos are the only PC games Ive purchased in recent times...

      Unfortunately, theres no really way for them to know-aside from noticing the downloads of the linux installer.

  164. stop whining by gregarine · · Score: 0

    Games for linux are gonna be few and far between cause very few use it for a personal computer. Don't waste my time or yours whining. Everyone knows this is true.

    --

    I like traffic lights
  165. I just switched my last MS box to Linux by freality · · Score: 1

    If HL2 works in Wine, I'll buy it. If not, I won't.

    Using Wine, I'm able to play Counter-Strike (without sound, which makes it difficult to own). With ePSXe, I'm able to play Wipout 3 (a great PS1 game). I could do both of these on Windows, but then I'm missing 1 full-time Linux box as a trade... simply not worth it. A friend of mine pointed out that some folks, including both of us, use UNIX *for the apps*. I'm OK using cygwin on windows if I have to, but it's only a short matter of time before I grab SecureCRT or JavaSSH to connect back to my home machine, and sanity. Emulated Bash&Emacs on Windows feels like emulated Counter-Strike in Linux. I guess Bash&Emacs are more important.

    With Windows, I really feel like I'm wasting my time. If I use it, and spend money to get games for it that I like, I'm postponing the day when I get what I want. Not to mention that it feels like a clunking mess, the Standard XP install using much more RAM and FS than my standard Lin install.

    So, I just deleted it. I fretted a bit about it, as I now really need to be serious about Office compatibility, but man, I feel 100% better. There's no MS in my house. Except the open win32 implementation in Wine, of course, which is... ironic, to say the least.

  166. I've got a question about the crappy linksite by Snaller · · Score: 1

    VUshitgames.com requires you to use Flash?! Does the Linux communite have Flash?

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  167. Here's a very simple rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's see, ATI and Nvidia both tout their cards as DX9 cards. I don't see DX9 on any linux box.

    So if you want games on Linux, tell the graphics card industry to make OpenGL optimized cards.

    I can picture a conversation at Valve.

    "We can make one of the most revolutionary games ever using DX9 or we can tone it down a good deal and make it workable on Linux. What do you think?"

    Oooooooooooooooo that's a tough one, make money? Yes please.

    Linux, SERVER not DESKTOP.

    Get over it.

  168. If you really wanted to stick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a fork in Microsoft's potato, rather than wasting time on Wine, the Linux community should figure out how to run X-Box apps.

  169. OS? What about the hardware? by gosand · · Score: 1
    Who cares if I have to dust off the Windows machine and fire it up to play Half-Life2? At least I can finally use that machine for something. What I am pissed about is that I have to shell out the cash for a new video card. My 32MB AIW-Pro card probably won't cut it for HL2. The upside is that I can replace the 16MB card in my Linux machine with the AIW-Pro, and get to play with video capturing on Linux.

    I am going to give Valve the benefit of the doubt. I'll bet that once they get the game out the door, they'll work on the Linux client. It wouldn't make sense for them to hold up the ship date for 1% of their potential market. So if you want the Linux client, you'll probably just have to wait. It isn't so bad, what do you really gain by getting the game the day it comes out? Hell, I played the multiplayer version of HL years ago, but didn't actually play and finish the standalone game until this year. No, I am not kidding.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  170. Missing the point by digidave · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I think most people here are missing the point. I've read posts about Valve employees coming from Microsoft, DirectX 9 being better than OpenGL and prohibitive costs in doing a Linux port. All good arguments, but not the main point of the article.

    Valve expects Linux users to support their game by running the server, but doesn't understand that they should support Linux users by giving them a client. If supporting Linux is too much work, then they should shove their Linux server up their ass and make due with whoever wants to run a Windows server.

    --
    The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
  171. Boycott by _iris · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It seems to me that the answer is in the question. A good portion of HL servers run on Linux. Those servers collectively hold a decent amount of power over the ongoing success of HL. If they shut down, demanding a Linux client, Valve sure would wake up.

  172. Re:IIRC, some forgot to read the advocacy how to.. by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    Ah yes... Loki... When they ported Civ 2 I was hoping to go down to my local CompUSA and pick up a copy. Loki said that would happen. It never did adn I eventually bought it off the Internet. I wanted to get it direct from Loki but as far as I can tell they never got their online store working. Other places where I tried to buy it were out of stock but I eventually found one. The same thing happened with Alpha Centauri, Railroad Tycoon and Tribes2. Ok, now I'm not an economics professor, but I think how it works is, if you want to make money you make sure your customers can buy your products...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  173. Why is it so hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to make game engines OS independent? All I want is to buy a game, stick it into my CD-ROM, have it boot and run without a need for an OS.

    1. Re:Why is it so hard by Zoolander · · Score: 1

      Don't flame me for mentioning Gentoo. but they are actually doing this. www.gentoogames.com have a live CD with Wolfenstein ET. Just boot the CD, and in a while you've got Wolfenstein running. Hasn't anyone else done this before?

      --
      Meep.
  174. Not just the initial development costs by artemis67 · · Score: 1

    Valve bailed out on the Mac port of the original Half-life mere days before the port was done. Why? Because they made a decision that they were going to issue NUMEROUS updates and bug fixes, and they knew that the Mac version would always lag behind the Windows version, meaning that Mac players would not be able to play against Windows players most of the time. That was the official line.

    I think the real reason Valve didn't release the Mac version was the cost of the patches, since Valve didn't charge for any of them. Will there be enough Mac or Linux sales to cover not only the initial development costs for each platform, but also the ongoing free patches and upgrades? Probably not.

  175. NetHack by Ralp · · Score: 1


    Restoring save file... You return to level 8 in Black Mesa.--More--

    Hello Gordon, welcome back to NetHack! You are a lawful male quantum physicist.

    Weapons
    a - a +0 9mm pistol (weapon in hand)
    b - 24 +0 bullets (in quiver)
    Armor
    c - a +1 H.E.V. suit (being worn)
    j - a cursed +0 pair of jumping boots (being worn)
    Tools
    d - a blessed +2 crowbar (alternate weapon; not wielded)
    e - a large box
    f - an uncursed pair of lenses (being worn)
    t - a blessed bag of holding
    (end)

    You miss the headcrab.
    You miss the headcrab. The headcrab hits!
    You just miss the headcrab. Your pet security guard hits the headcrab.
    You miss the headcrab. The headcrab hits!
    d - a blessed +2 crowbar (weapon in hand)
    You begin bashing monsters with your crowbar. The headcrab is killed!--More--
    Your pet security guard picks up a headcrab corpse. "That'll look nice in my trophy room."

    1. Re:NetHack by mog · · Score: 1

      I would totally play that nethack hack.

  176. Come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    come on people. with an extra 2 gig hard drive you can dual boot with windows 2000, and not even contiminate your precious precious.

    Linux could be a fantastic gaming platform, but, hey, isn't enough that its a fantastic everything else platform? Really. I mean, I am just happy that new games come to the PC platform in general, instead of being made exclusive to the PS/2 or GameCube format.

  177. Priceless... by BadmanX · · Score: 1

    You guys buy into a philosophy and a system that makes selling commercial software as difficult as possible, then bitch, moan and whine when nobody makes commercial software for your system.

    Games are commercial software, and they always will be. You can't make money by selling the manual to a game. You can't make money by selling a "service plan" for a game. You can only make money by selling the software itself, a transaction Free Software is specifically designed to thwart.

    You've got no one to blame but yourselves.

  178. Re:MS does good... Good Grief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In case you haven't noticed, Windows is becoming a less and less atractive platform for games. Microsoft is not going to be able to provide a (more) secure platform and a fast gaming platform in the same box.

    Therefore: X-Box.

    The whole reason for X-Box is to hold onto the important gaming/tweaking market. Of course trying to prevent X-Box hacking is contrary to promoting the X-Box for this market, but wth.

    Linux will be the gaming platform of choice.

  179. Great Selling Point for the Corporation by virtigex · · Score: 1
    Has anybody though of mentioning the crappy game support in Linux as a selling point in the corporation? I guess Linux has Solitaire, which means that managers and secretaries will still spend their time, but engineers will not play these games.

    Oh wait... this is Slashdot. First we need a browser that blocks Slashdot.

    1. Re:Great Selling Point for the Corporation by NemoX · · Score: 1

      Macs hold only 4% of desktop O/S' and Linux is at 1%. At only 1% of the market why waste their time? At home I run 100% linux, but at work I develope M$ only software...why? Because it is impossible to explain how all the extra effort (programming exceptions, beta testing, extra hardware/software) is worth going cross platform for only 5% of the market, Unfortunatly, it's simple economics at this point. Get more of your friends to move to Linux, do something to make the home market grow to even 20%, and you will have your Linux support for everything. In the mean time, I write programs in my spare time to make Linux more enjoyable for the masses, as do *many* others. We'll get there...just not quite yet.

  180. Default Filter for CS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux dedicated server. I run XP and will probably never make an install of any form of Linux on this computer, but I recognize the stability and low latency that comes with most Linux servers.

  181. screw linux, port to OS X! by Ffakr · · Score: 1

    sorry, thought the subject would get people's attention.

    I do want to make a case for OS X though.

    Mac software has historically carried a lower support cost than software on other platforms (though I'm sure any differences are much smaller now than in the Win98 and earlier days)

    Mac users spend more on software than Windows users (per user per year). Mac OS users exist in a slightly different culture... a culture where you're so happy to see the software you want on the shelf that you actually buy it instead of just firing up Morpheus. The only real exception to this 'rule' are poor designers... they swap Adobe licenses like it's going out of style...

    Apple _finally_ has hardware that will run modern games nicely. I'm not sure I've been able to say this since the Blue and White G3 days (when Intel started to pull away).

    Here's the deal... OS X is an easier sell for a company like Valve. You have a supported OS (don't start about the wealth of great linux support on the web, I know it's out there but corporations put more value in a manned phone line). You have robust graphic drivers and a company behind them that would be very happy to help you with any issues you find. You have a large corporation who would back your development efforts... heck HL2 would probably end up on the index of http://www.apple.com

    what does this buy Linux users? They get an OpenGL 1.4 codebase from the OS X project. The only thing left to port is the networking and coreaudio... repackage the installer.... badda bing.

    "stupid ffakr" -- that's me.

    --

    I'm not feeling witty so bite me

  182. Re:OS? What about the hardware? by bucky0 · · Score: 1

    I'll bet that once they get the game out the door, they'll work on the Linux client.

    Unfortunately, the head guys have stated repeatedly that neither HL2 nor the underlying 'Source' engine will be ported to linux. It's a shame, really.

    --

    -Bucky
  183. MOD PARENT UP: MAC HL2 PETITION by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    2575 signatures so far.

  184. fire up kazaa... by jonnyfivealive · · Score: 1

    ...on a friend's machine and download vmware

    i used it to install and run visual studio .net on my redhat box. i think that's pretty impressive.

    given the money someday, i will actually purchase a copy from them, it is outstanding software.

  185. Na-uh! by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1

    It's not business as usual, it's an "inexcusable insult on their behalf!!!"

    *sigh*...

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
  186. Like it or not, linux is a server platform... by mess31173 · · Score: 1

    Like it or not linux is a server platform and not a desktop OS. So it makes sense, at least for the time being, to only make a server for HL2, and not a client.

    Not trolling, I don't care how great you think Linux on the desktop is, it's still not as refined as Windows.

  187. Why not relax & play the Mac version of Half L by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, wait - yeah.

    There wasn't EVEN a server version for Mac,
    much less a client.

    Count your blessings, Saint Nix

  188. This was insightful? by Svartalf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They could have easily written the engine to use OpenGL as well as DirectX. It's that plain, that simple. I should know, Linux Game Publishing does this sort of thing on a regular basis.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    1. Re:This was insightful? by The+Evil+Couch · · Score: 1
      yes, they could have.

      but then we'd have to wait an extra 6 months for the game to come out.

  189. It's the ARB's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Is it Valve's fault? No. Is it Linux's fault? No. Is it the video card manufacturer's fault? No. Is it any of that? No.

    It's OpenGL's fault. They sat on their asses with OGL2.0 and now that they've FINALLY approved OGL1.5, which is equitable to DX9 (and yes, HL2 makes extensive use of DX9 pixel shaders, which is why NVIDIA cards perform so badly), drivers for OGL1.5 won't be out for another few months at least. If the ARB wasn't stupid and did this last year, you might see HL2 using GLSLang rather than HLSL. But, you didn't. Blame the ARB.

  190. Welcome by Zed2K · · Score: 1

    Now you know how mac users felt for all those years. Welcome to a niche platform.

  191. I've read that UT2004 is better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And not from UT fans or Epic, either.

    All of the previews I've read from review sites, smaller and larger, have commented on how impressed they were with UT2004.

    Many of them have said things amounting to "UT2004 is much much more of an improvement to UT2003 than we thought", "UT2004 is the spiritual successor to the original UT", and "UT2004 will probably be the game to purchase over the holiday season." These aren't actual quotes, just paraphrases of quotes that I've read--paraphrased because I've heard different previewers say very similar things.

    More than once, I've read previewers make comparisons between UT2004 and Battlefield 1942. That's because the new UT2004 has a new mode, Onslaught, that is much like the original UT domination, but more involved, and involving capturing nodes on the way to capturing a main base. Put that together with vehicles, and you have something that apparently plays much like BF1942, but science fictiony, with better graphics and apparently smoother gameplay.

    Or so the previewers say.

    I highly recommend you check out sites like Gamespot, IGN, Gamespy, and other places (I can't remember which other ones offhand). I'm really looking forward to UT2004--it sounds like a really great game. I find myself thinking of buying a new graphics card for that game alone (although I'm currently running UT2003 just fine on a GForce2).

  192. Turn Off your Half Life Linux Server by moojin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Coordinate a day with other Half Life Linux Server administrators to select a day once a week, two weeks, or month to turn off your Half Life Linux Server. Make sure that the creators of Half Life 2 know that the reason that you are doing this is to convince them to release a Linux client of HL2.

    --
    Why did I lurk so long before registering for a Slashdot account? I could have had a Slashdot ID of less than 100000.
  193. Doesn't mean that they can't offload that work... by Svartalf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I assure you, Linux Game Publishing, Hyperion, and others would be more than happy to help w/the testing, tuning, etc. with a game company. And we'd not be mis-managing the situation like Loki did.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  194. This is news?!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "How will the rest of the Linux gaming community react to the release of Half-Life 2? Boot into Windows? Wait for WINE or WineX support? Get the Xbox version? With so many Half-Life servers running on Linux, will the same be true for Half-Life 2?"

    I think that there are far more important things to worry about and strive for in the Linux world than this.

    Come on, people! If you really wanted to run games, you wouldn't use a PC to do it, you would buy a gaming system.

    Let's move on, here. Nothing to see... It's called "Half Life" for a reason: it is not even worth saying "get a life" to this article.
  195. How many times does this have to be said? by Svartalf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Loki didn't go out of business because there wasn't a market. Loki went out of business because the upper management was utterly clueless.

    Scott bought some 50k units of those stupid tins, etc. and delayed the release of the Linux version (which SHOULD have went out only a week or so AFTER the Windows version) by nearly a month. Worse, he wasted the money on the massive production run when he should have done something more reasonable like 5k units to limit his losses. Had he done that, the margins per unit would have been smaller, but the game might have broke even.

    Loki bit off more games than they could comfortably afford and did pathetically stupid business decisions with the ones they DID have.

    THAT is what killed Loki.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    1. Re:How many times does this have to be said? by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      Loki didn't go out of business because there wasn't a market. Loki went out of business because the upper management was utterly clueless.

      I don't work in the games industry, but my friends that do assure me that all games companies are managed by idiots!

    2. Re:How many times does this have to be said? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Scott had known that it was only going to sell 5k units he would have been able to shut the doors more quickly and send the employees away with some severance pay. Or better yet, not have even started the company. LOL, Linux "market"!

      Loki bit off more games than Linux users were prepared to pay for, thieves that they are.

      LINUX USERS are what killed Loki.

  196. Depends on the abstraction they used in the engine by Svartalf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If they're abstracting the DirectX stuff, like most games seem to be doing (Well, some do a better job of it than others... :-) then it's a moderately simple matter of sliding in the changes to the abstraction layer to support the other platforms. Some of the code's warped because of DirectX, but unless they're doing some bog stupid things like thoroughly intermixing the DirectX code throughout the game engine code (Not likely, but possible), then a port is possible- if they're amenable to the act and willing to license the rights for a reasonable rate.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  197. No, but making Linux games implies MacOS X by Svartalf · · Score: 1

    Carbon doesn't provide 3D. OpenGL does.
    Carbon doesn't provide Networking. OpenTransport/OpenPlay/NetSprockets does.

    Carbon only provides input layer code.

    Once you port to Linux, you already have the makings of a MacOS X game since the code uses OpenGL and either Activision's ActiveNet (LGPL) or OpenPlay/NetSprockets (Apple's public license). SDL handles the input layer issues.

    Mike Phillips just provided the patches for the GPLed SoulRide that allow the game to compile for and run on MacOS X. They were a logical consequence of the clean-up work on the Linux version we're doing for the commercial release of the same.

    We're pondering what to do with Ballistics and Bandits in the same regard- because it's a short hop over from the Linux version.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  198. XBox by MasterSLATE · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you won't go windows, why go Xbox? isn't it essentially the same, since its all microsoft?

    SLATE

    --

    [sig]www.masterslate.org[/sig]
    1. Re:XBox by donkiemaster · · Score: 1

      Most hardcore linux users hail from the same state. The state of Denial. If you can't see the Windows then they aren't there.

    2. Re:XBox by Tidal+Flame · · Score: 1

      I shouldn't even be bothering with this, but besides hundreds of other differences, Windows is an operating system - XBox is a video game console. Yeah, they're totally the same thing just because they're both made by MS. Who the hell modded that "insightful?"

  199. the real solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    of course, what would happen if all the linux servers of Half-Life disappeared for say a week in protest? Valve would be in definite trouble if that many servers disappeard. 70-80% of half-life servers are linux servers, iirc. the number of complaints valve would receive about that would be ridiculous.

  200. You don't need to use separate sound engines... by Svartalf · · Score: 1

    OpenAL sits on Linux, Windows, and MacOS X. Unreal Tournament 2k3 uses it. America's Army:Operations uses it. Most Linux games use it.

    There's a solution that actually makes sense that allows you to target all three OS platforms without much more effort than targeting Windows solely.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  201. Save Us Bill! by Vagary · · Score: 1

    I have a similiar philosophy as that of the article author: I'd rather do work on my PC and play games on a console. Unfortunately, the kinds of games I like to play are mods of first-person shooters, which have not been particularly available on a console. What I'm praying for is that Microsoft will be able to use some of their clout to get real, non-crippled ports on the XBox. And for the love of IntelliMouses, please let me use a proper input device!

  202. DirectX isn't one library... by Svartalf · · Score: 1

    It's a complex of several different ones accessable under COM calls to the same. Microsoft markets the thing as one unified thing, but it's more akin to the multiple libraries- much more than most people think.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  203. How about by Gay+Nigger · · Score: 0, Troll

    You just boot up the copy of Windows that almost certainly came with your machine when you bought it, you fat, whiny dork.

  204. I won't buy it. by Jagasian · · Score: 1

    If it won't run on my computer, then I won't buy it.

  205. Comparisons to Mac Game Market wrong by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Linux gaming is at the point where Mac Gaming has been for the past 10 years, hopefully it will increase in the future, but the only way to do it is to be good advocates and make noise with our wallets AND tell the companies that you bought their product BECAUSE of the linux version.

    The Mac Game Market is not a useful comparison, the Mac and Linux situations are different. Counting users is a mistake. The Mac situation wildly differs from Linux in that Mac users can not dual boot or effectively emulate. On the Mac they not only have to emulate the APIs but the CPU instructions as well. For modern games it a native version or nothing. On the other hand Linux users can use the Win32 version of the game. Most Linux gamers dual boot or use Wine so they are already customers. Targeting Linux does not generate any new money from them, it merely replaces a Win32 sale with a Linux sale. That's a money losing situation for the developer. The Linux Game Market only consists of those Linux Gamers who would never buy the Win32 version, those who would do without rather than dual boot or use Wine.

    1. Re:Comparisons to Mac Game Market wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand Linux users can use the Win32 version of the game.

      I don't bevause it's too much trouble. Dual-booting and wine are both a pain in the @$$.

      Plus, Linux runs on non-IA32 systems, so a fraction of Linux users can neither dual-boot to Windows nor run Wine.

    2. Re:Comparisons to Mac Game Market wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "On the other hand Linux users can use the Win32 version of the game."

      I don't bevause it's too much trouble. Dual-booting and wine are both a pain in the @$$.


      Then you are one of those extremely rare members of the potential Linux Game Market. Rare with respect to Linux users, not x86 PC users in general.

      Plus, Linux runs on non-IA32 systems, so a fraction of Linux users can neither dual-boot to Windows nor run Wine.

      Sun, Alpha? Sorry, those folks are so few they are commercially irrelevant with respect to games. Targeting those folks is not as simple as recompiling, and sometimes that is not simple either. Commercial games have to be tested, patched, etc. These folks can't support such efforts.

      PowerPC? The same arguments apply as with Sun and Alpha. In addition the x86 dual boot argument applies as well, however in this case the developer would target Mac OS X rather than PowerPC Linux. Incidentally I dual boot Mac OS 9 and Yellow Dog Linux on an old PowerMac 8500.

  206. Hey Guess What? by greymond · · Score: 0, Troll

    Linux isn't for games. Sorry. Yeah I know you can play Quake, and Master of Orion now and maybe a few others using wine or winx, but lets get real Linux, just like apple, will never be as good a gaming platform as windows. Sorry. Bitch about performance, Bitch about pipelines and fantasize about 64bit architecture, but the FACT is windows 0wNz on the gaming platform and with so many game developers contnue to stick wiht that trend its gonna stay that way.

    So keep your linux for your server. Your mac for your printing, and windows for your games.

  207. I will keep playing Battlefield 1942 by javajeff · · Score: 1

    On Windows of course. The Secret Weapons of World War 2 is great.

  208. Re:Here we go... - Math by jratcliffe · · Score: 1

    5% of 300MM is 15MM, not 1.5MM. 1% of 15MM is 150k. You've got the end result right (300,000,000*.05*.01=150,000), but the process wrong.

  209. Mac OS X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If there's a Linux version then don't forget about us Mac users with OS X!!! :)

    I'm still kinda pissed Macs never got Half life. At least we have Unreal...

  210. I don't get it.. by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

    Ok, maybe a linux user can help me understand this... but why do you want to play games in linux? What makes it so great and advantageous over Windows game/graphics/sound-wise? When new games come out, it seems a lot of linux users say they'll try to run it under Wine, or they complain that there's no native linux port, etc. etc... why not just dual boot Windows/Linux? Make a 5-10 gig Windows partition, and have fun playing your games.

    --
    Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    1. Re:I don't get it.. by ReNeGaDe75 · · Score: 1

      Because some of us like Linux. Heh, stupid questions yield stupid answers.

      Personally, I don't like having to close all my windows and reboot my entire system to play a game. I'd prefer to run it natively in Linux.

      --
      Hypocrisy is the 8th deadly sin.
  211. i know! i know! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How will the rest of the Linux gaming community react to the release of Half-Life 2? Boot into Windows? Wait for WINE or WineX support? Get the Xbox version?

    Pirate it because "information wants to be free."

    You Linux clowns are all alike.

  212. Simple economics by FreshFunk510 · · Score: 1

    Convince them through simple supply and demand. Like other people have said here, write in! But the thing you guys don't note is that they won't comply because they somehow "fear the community" or "love the community" (although they might)... they'll simply do it from a financial perspective. If enough Linux users write in then they'll analyze the cost of doing a linux port versus the profits gained from doing so. Simple as that.

    --


    "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
  213. Just keep buying ID games.. by msimm · · Score: 1

    Support your friends at ID Software. Most people that don't feel that strongly about it will already have an extra Windows computer or a Windows partition.

    But I think its really important to show your support for companies that support (or generally seem to remotely care about) our community. Sierra has shown some interest (supported the porting of the last Tribes 2 patch to the now unsupported Loki port), but this is the kind of release that demonstrates where their loyalties are (or aren't).

    Most be games will come with a Linux server now and those that don't give us anything back don't really get the Linux community. We may be a minority, but we are (at the very least) an excellent resource.

    --
    Quack, quack.
  214. I simply accepted it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are no commercial games for FreeBSD, so I don't buy any. I have been thinking about Unreal Tournament, but... I prefer to have a native version instead of Linux emulation.

  215. VMWare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you have enough RAM and disk space then you can always run whatever windows app you like with even better performance than windows itself with VMWare

    1. Re:VMWare by adewolf · · Score: 1

      VMWare will NOT run OPENGL or Direct-X games.

      Alex

      --
      "The Brady Bunch is back...working homicide"
  216. He's missing the point completely... by packman · · Score: 1

    He looks at the facts from the point of view of a linux-geek. The thing is - most of the servers online are not owned by linux-freaks - most of them are from a gaming-related company or a clan.
    The servers simply run best and require less resources on linux - and linux-serverhosting is cheaper than windows-servers. THAT are the reasons that so many game-servers run linux - not that some geek runs a server for a windows-game just because it runs in linux. At this moment - there are thousands of halflife servers running linux - when there is no native linux-version - would that all be linux-geeks that like it that there is no native version? Don't think so - just the fact that there are already so much HL servers running linux, and the fact that there were already an awfull lot of them long before I was able to even think of starting HL in Wine - or WineX even existed - proves the author wrong.

    Another point - about HL2 not running on linux. OpenGL simply doesn't support the necessary features that the HL2 engine uses - unless it is done thu vendor-specific extentions of nVidia or ATI. The HL developers already didn't like it to write a specific rendering path for the last-generation of nVidia cards because they were to slow when running with the generic DX9 rendering path - so they are certainly not going to write 2 separate renderers using opengl for the few customers that want to run it in linux - because - face it - we are a minority in gaming-land. From a developers point of view - I can perfectly understand that (I don't say I like it). Also they don't have any advantages supporting and developing a linux-version - linux is there - and it runs their servers just fine at this moment. Epic had to develop in linux anyway for the PS2 version of their engine. Owkay - they had to write the OpenGL renderer - that's true - but by experience I know it is easyer when you can port a game and run & test the game itself it in the development environment - and have one guy writing the PS2 rendering engine - and let the others work on the port - while able to test it without the necessary equipment - believe me - I do embedded development - but we test and run the main-applications on pc, simulating the hardware - and have one guy (read: me) do the hardware dependand stuff. Yes - that takes a one-time development of the testing-libraries for pc - but in the business I am - I see another type of hardware every half year or so - so it is worth it.
    I strongly doubt that we will actually see a PS2 version of HL2 any time soon - so there will be no need for them to port/run the game in linux.

  217. omg... stfu plz.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Yadda, yadda..

    Slashdot wouldn't exist if there weren't programmers getting paid for what they're doing. They get paid when the company they work for makes money off of a product. That means somebody is selling something.


    Slashdot _would_ exist without "programmers getting paid" for keeping it alive, and I dare say it would even suck less. You have a low enough ID# to remember when /. was independent or have you forgotten allready?


    Ideology is poor currency at the grocery store.


    At a grocery store maybe. But grocery stores are not the only place where you get the stuff to fill your belly. Ever heard of collectives? Most of the OSS is collective work too. How do you think people filled their bellies all the thousands of years when currency itself didn't exist?


    The OSS developers do their best and then share and take advantage of eachothers works thus eliminating the "suits taxation" wherer a lot of their sweat is converted to money for in effect non-producing individuals. Also, it really shold be needless to mention all the OSS companies who sell services instead, but I guess you may have forgotten about them too?


    And remember: Don't eat your soul to fill your belly!


    Cheers...

    1. Re:omg... stfu plz.. by murdocj · · Score: 1
      How do you think people filled their bellies all the thousands of years when currency itself didn't exist?

      Pretty safe bet they didn't run around saying that "food wants to be free". They probably *paid* for it, in one form or another, either by harvesting it themselves or trading something of value.

      I'm willing to be that some of the people in this thread who are so annoyed that Valve isn't addressing the Linux desktop market are the same people who don't want Linux to demean itself by catering to the unwashed masses. If the desktop Linux market was bigger, convincing software houses to port to Linux wouldn't be such a big deal.

  218. This is why I've succumb to using vmware... by xaoslaad · · Score: 1

    I wanna run Linux, but I play all sorts of cutting edge games. I don't see Lock On: Modern Air Combat coming out for Linux at the same time as the Windows version. I'm still waiting for the Raven Shield dedicated Linux server to come out like Ubi promised. I don't see EQ II for Linux coming, I don't see Half Life 2 for Linux coming out anytime soon after the Windows version either....

    On the flip side I'm also deeply interested in networking, operating systems, and interoperating with them I have a plethora of OS'es all running.... on one system concurrently. See part of the side effect of being a rabid gamer is having an uuber powerful system. This pays off when running VMWare cause I can have several OS'es going all at once. RedHat 9, RedHat Severn, Netware 6.5, OS 2 Warp, Windows 2003 Server, Solaris 9 x86, blah, blah, and on and on.

    So, I love to run Linux, but it's not my only OS. And besides, I have Linux on my 'server' too, so it's all good.

    So Linux lover? game freak? whatever? It's all good...

  219. Stop whining. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You wouldn't pay for it anyways.

  220. The sig says it all by t0ny · · Score: 1

    articles like this show how truly pathetic people are.

    --

    Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

  221. Re:directX...never forget by FurryFeet · · Score: 1

    So, it already happened, and the only problem for PC users was... no Halo?
    Dude, my nephews have an Xbox. I've played Halo.
    Halo sucks. I mean, it seriously sucks big, fat hairy, stinky monkey nuts.
    So, I'm not afraid.

  222. Sorry, I can't watch this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In case you didn't notice, 1.5 million is about as much as the almost the complete market. Starcraft, which is still sold today, sold ~ 4 million copies. The Blizzard Guys were celebrating when they shipped the 1 millionth copy of Diablo II. So, even if the "real" market for Half-Life II is 5,000,000 copies (which sounds ok, since it is a 3D shooter and those are more straightforward/popular in General) - 1% of all those gamers might be linux gamers - I don't think that is a small figure, most of the gamers are about 14-18 years old and can't operate a DOS console (or whatever that thing is called in XP).

    Now let's say half of that mass buys the game, 0,5% -> 25,000 copies - and those over a time period of about 4 years. Maybe 18,000 of those will sell at the full price (other 7,000 come from the bargain-bin after a year or so). 18,000 copies, maybe at $20 (actual profit), that's ~ $360,000 - even if they say "no support at all for the linux version" - which won't help selling - that is not enough to make a profit. Those units have to be made, the port-dev team has to be paid, etc. Now that leaves an amount of money that in a large company like valve probably doesn't even pay for lost time of the devs who could bring out the next title a month earlier.

    On the other hand, I personally think that this all just because of Steam - they want their DRM stuff be distributed!

  223. WTF mods. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If anyone ever again says the mods here are pro-linux and anti-windows, remind me to smack them. What pro-linux sites do you know would mod up a blatant flame and troll like this, even using a word like "loonix". The microsofties have taken over! What posseses M$ fanboys to come to slashdot? Are they so zealotus that they absolutely must defend there precious product?

    1. Re:WTF mods. by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for posting anonymously!

      My point is that linux/freebsd/unix/whatever are all meant to be true "workstation" or "server" operating systems. They're not meant for Joe consumer or Joe gamer. The fact that they take so much time to properly configure for gaming (if it even can be configured) and the absence of a "unified" device interface (Windows has DirectX, what does the linux side have that's universal/standard?) is a big reason why games aren't targetted for the platform.

      If your target market is 98% Windows and 2% Linux, I'd say you'd shoot for Windows too.

      The fact that most linux users are anti MS seems to help fuel these "we want games like windows has" sentiments. For the record, I'm not an MS fanboy.

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    2. Re:WTF mods. by rifter · · Score: 1

      If anyone ever again says the mods here are pro-linux and anti-windows, remind me to smack them. What pro-linux sites do you know would mod up a blatant flame and troll like this, even using a word like "loonix". The microsofties have taken over! What posseses M$ fanboys to come to slashdot? Are they so zealotus that they absolutely must defend there precious product?

      Microsoft pays for the ads that keep this site running. They own this site. So shut up, you ungrateful loonix terrorist! :)

      Actually I think getting HalfLife to run in Lunix is asking far too much :)

    3. Re:WTF mods. by Torinaga-Sama · · Score: 1

      You are correct, the truth is the silent majority here probably uses microsoft products to some extent. This does not make Microsoft us fanboys, just people who utilize technology. Zealotry is for religion.

      The point is, if there is a new gadget or a new way of doing things, I am going to be interested, it doesn't matter who makes it.

      Embrace, integrate.

      "There is more than one way to do it."

      --
      (/local/home/curiosity)-#who -u|grep thecat|cut -c 44-49|xargs kill -9
    4. Re:WTF mods. by AugstWest · · Score: 1

      The fact that they take so much time to properly configure for gaming (if it even can be configured) and the absence of a "unified" device interface (Windows has DirectX, what does the linux side have that's universal/standard?) is a big reason why games aren't targetted for the platform.

      We have SDL

    5. Re:WTF mods. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... which I hope Ill never have to work with again.

  224. Nice rant- thank you. by Svartalf · · Score: 1

    Couldn't have put it better myself. You missed one other option, though- buy the games that are natively available for Linux, such as Neverwinter Nights, UT2k3, DooM 3, Majesty, Ballistics (Yes, I know it's not available yet, but it's in beta right now...), Bandits, etc.

    More games purchased means showing that there is an actual market there. In the case of buying LGP published titles, it means we can afford to buy the rights to more titles to be produced.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  225. non-x86 Linux Irrelevant wrt Games by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

    "On the other hand Linux users can use the Win32 version of the game."

    I don't bevause it's too much trouble. Dual-booting and wine are both a pain in the @$$.


    Then you are one of those extremely rare members of the potential Linux Game Market. Rare with respect to Linux users, not x86 PC users in general.

    Plus, Linux runs on non-IA32 systems, so a fraction of Linux users can neither dual-boot to Windows nor run Wine.

    Sun, Alpha? Sorry, those folks are so few they are commercially irrelevant with respect to games. Targeting those folks is not as simple as recompiling, and sometimes that is not simple either. Commercial games have to be tested, patched, etc. These folks can't support such efforts.

    PowerPC? The same arguments apply as with Sun and Alpha. In addition the x86 dual boot argument applies as well, however in this case the developer would target Mac OS X rather than PowerPC Linux. Incidentally I dual boot Mac OS 9 and Yellow Dog Linux on an old PowerMac 8500.

  226. Thanks for that swift piece of insight, yet... by getnuked · · Score: 1

    the point of having a Linux port is so I don't have to reboot my PC!

  227. Re:I won't be buying it -- Won't help Linux by MrResistor · · Score: 1

    If there's one thing that's true of computers, it's that everybody has a different experience with them. Mine has been exactly the opposite of yours, at least on the desktop (obviously we agree on what's best for servers). All I can say is that you should try it again, the Linux desktop has improved dramaticly in the last few years, enough so that I strongly suspect that's the main difference in our respective experiences.

    [disclaimer]: I use SuSE exclusively, YMMV.

    I constantly sent back the registration cards for games with "Purchased for use with Linux" scrawled on them in bright red letters.

    I commend you for doing that, but unless there's a box for Linux on the card, I very much doubt that there's a field for the person entering that data to put it in, so it's quite unlikely that it gets to anyone that matters. I could be wrong, though.

    While it was fun using Linux as my desktop OS, and toying with various window managers, multiple desktops etc. I found it just ate too much of my time up.

    When this changes, and Linux consumes less of my personal time on the desktop, I will switch back to using it on the desktop - but not until then.


    I think the answer to the second paragraph is in the first. I actually made the switch because I found that Linux required LESS of my time as a desktop OS than Windows (a large part of that is that it's better able to withstand the unholy duo that is my wife and daughter, while still giving them all the functionality they want). That's not to say that I don't spend more time messing with Linux than I did with Windows, but the vast majority of that time is what I consider play time, whereas with windows it was almost exclusively maintainance and repair.

    --
    Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  228. ..sigh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Running Windows in a dual boot config for the sole purpose of gaming would not mean you need XP Pro, nor would it take hours upon hours to set up. Win98 is still fine for gaming, not to mention XP Home. If you think Windows is more difficult than Linux, then that's a personal issue of yours, not the standard. (remember, we're just talkin about using windows as a secondary os, in a game console fashion...)

    "I finally said goodby to Windows almost a year ago, and I won't be going back for a mere game, no matter how good it is. If they won't support me, I won't support them."


    Well goody for you. Hey, on a similar note, I won't be supporting Nintendo, because they don't support me and my XBox.

    No, it's not apples and oranges. If game companies only want to develop exclusively for DirectX, then that's the linux-only users' problem, not theirs. They're not being unreasonable in not going out of their way to support the Linux community. Businesses that support open-source / *nix are commendable, but we shouldn't expect it from them
    1. Re:..sigh.. by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      Running Windows in a dual boot config for the sole purpose of gaming would not mean you need XP Pro, nor would it take hours upon hours to set up. Win98 is still fine for gaming, not to mention XP Home.

      I'm aware of theat. However, my experience has given me a dim view of MS' home offerings. As I've already stated, my time is not worthless, and the Pro versions are superior in that respect for things I'm in the habit of doing, such as networking and swapping out hardware.

      Additionally, I've found that 98SE gets less stable the more current you stay with the patches. A fully patched 98SE is more of a PITA than an unpatched install, which is clearly not a viable option. Stability overall, patch or un-, is another reason I won't be buying 9x. Did you miss the part about Windows requiring for more of my attention than an OS should? I know that the NT based versions can at least go more than 6 months without the need for a format/reinstall.

      Finally, if I'm going to lay out my hard-earned cash I want something that's both current and going to be supported for the forseeable future. This is hardly a Windows specific issue, I wouldn't pay for SuSE 6.x either.

      Considering all these factors, clearly the only Windows versions worth paying for are 2k Pro and XP Pro, and XP is the newer of the two and supposedly much better for gaming. The choice seems pretty clear to me. I would have expected you to understand this before you embarked on your advocacy.

      If you think Windows is more difficult than Linux, then that's a personal issue of yours, not the standard.

      Of course it's not the standard. I actually took the time to get to know Linux as well as I knew Windows. The standard is to download a RH or Mandrake ISO, play with it for a week, and then declare it too hard to use without putting any real effort into learning how to use it.

      (remember, we're just talkin about using windows as a secondary os, in a game console fashion...)

      If Windows enjoyed console-like stability and simplicity, you might have a valid arguement there.

      Well goody for you. Hey, on a similar note, I won't be supporting Nintendo, because they don't support me and my XBox.

      And you think Nintendo doesn't consider that a problem? They may not be considering porting their major titles, but I assure you the business they aren't getting from you is very much on their minds.

      If game companies only want to develop exclusively for DirectX, then that's the linux-only users' problem, not theirs.

      Are you not aware that we live in a capitalist society? Are you not aware that games are a luxury item? As such, the fact that they will not be getting my business IS their problem, NOT mine. They need my business far more than I need their product.

      They're not being unreasonable in not going out of their way to support the Linux community. Businesses that support open-source / *nix are commendable, but we shouldn't expect it from them

      I don't expect any company to support Linux, but I see no reason to support a company that doesn't. They've chosen not to support Linux, and that makes their product useless to me.

      The position you've taken, although I doubt it's concious on your part, is that not only should I buy their product anyway, but I should go to a great deal of effort and multiple times the expense of their product in order to make it useful to me, even though they are clearly not willing to put forth equivalent effort for me. How is that more reasonable than my position?

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  229. He's right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, he's right.
    Microsoft has stated numerous times that Windows is faster than Linux!

    Not to mention Windows 2003 Server can save you a nickel.

  230. Strang game professor... by newbiefan · · Score: 1

    The only winning move is not to play.

  231. Isn't "Linux Gamer" synonymous with "Mac Gamer?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [nt]

  232. Get the Xbox version? (???) by JhAgA · · Score: 1

    So, I suppose I should spend $$$$$ in a Xbox than $$$ in Windows XP just because I'm not fond of old Bill... Linux isn't yet suited for gaming, live with it!

    It's even worse than whining because Mario Bross was never released to the Genesis or Sonic was never released to the SNES... Because THEN you would have to buy a new console to play your favorite game.

  233. You are a fucking loser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shut the fuck up you moron.
    If you want to play games, get a pc or a console. Shut the fuck up about not having a game released on linux.

  234. Not exactly. by Svartalf · · Score: 1

    Id doesn't take an extra six months because of that.
    Epic doesn't take an extra six months because of that.

    It all depends on the quality of the developers- if it's going to take an extra six months to come out, you may want to wonder about the quality of the code coming from the game company at that point.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    1. Re:Not exactly. by The+Evil+Couch · · Score: 1
      but id and Epic plan ahead to do just that and have coders experienced in writing in both. I suspect that the developers for Half Life 2 are sticking with what they know and not bothering to get to the level of proficiency in openGL required to impliment all the things that they've already done in D3D.

      had they bothered to plan for it in the beginning (or if mid-level corporate meddlers listened to them), then creating an openGL version of it wouldn't be much of a task. but they didn't, so there we are.

  235. Uh, watch the generalizations there... by Svartalf · · Score: 1

    I DO work in the games industry as a consultant/contractor. My current moonlight gig happens to be Linux Game Publishing. Michael Simms isn't an idiot by any stretch of the imagination. And, I do know for a fact that Id's not ran by idiots nor is Epic. The remainder may be up for debate, but the generalization's pretty much wrong.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  236. I have to ask again, this is insightful? by Svartalf · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There's as many things that can go wrong with a Windows install as there is with a Linux install these days with a game. These days, it's actually rather easy to get a game going under Linux- in fact, with the good hardware (which, by the way, happens to largely be the same on both OSes...) you're going to get no major issues with a Linux game whatsoever. However, you've got one other thing that seems to be an issue with Windows (XP in particular) that doesn't seem to be so with Linux on the same hardware.

    The PCI latencies can be off (That's a VERY common thing in Windows)- it can throw the OS or the app completely off, causing stuttering in sound or skipped frames with the video. Doesn't seem to happen on Linux based setups on the same hardware, but under XP, it does bizarre things with your applications.

    Suffice it to say, basing the current state of affairs off of what they were a year or two ago is making an error in that you're operating off of old info.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  237. Don't support them, but... by incom · · Score: 1

    Don't support these companies, but don't deprive yourself either. If you try the game and like it, then play it. Just don't pay for it, pirate it! And the windows you'll need, pirate that too! And if you find that it isn't so good that you can't resist it, then resist it. Don't help it's popularity. Don't host servers, etc. But please, use your money to reward only, not because society expects payment.

    --
    True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
  238. Right game at right time? What are you smoking? by Kashif+Shaikh · · Score: 1

    My take on the Sierra/Valve thing is they had the right game at the right time. A good 32 player supporting engine that ran on your average machine of the day.

    If you look at the post-mortem reports on Half-Life1, it was NOT that they were creating another FPS that "just happened" to be fun and ran on low-end hardware. It's guys like you that "blow off" the efforts of game developers.

    Rather, you would see Half-Life was designed on a weekly-basis to be fun; so much so that they had a principle where the player would not get lost after 5 minutes(i.e. they put lots of mini-goals). Half-Life brought back the concepts of "huge monsters and arenas"(i.e. the tentacle-level) that FPS of the day have forgotten.

    Where Half-Life got lucky was in the mod-department - CounterStrike. And the fact using an older engine ran pretty well on current hardware.

    1. Re:Right game at right time? What are you smoking? by Awptimus+Prime · · Score: 1

      If you look at the post-mortem reports on Half-Life1, it was NOT that they were creating another FPS that "just happened" to be fun and ran on low-end hardware. It's guys like you that "blow off" the efforts of game developers.

      They were lucky to have the right people working on the project. They were lucky the mod community picked them. They were lucky Unreal Tournament didn't quite fit the appetite of as many gamers, etc..

      I'm not blowing off the efforts of developers; just recognizing they had an element of luck to their product's popularity.

  239. Re:I won't be buying it -- Won't help Linux by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1
    Same situation here. I buy iD games when they come out because they have native Mac and Linux support, Carmack is a decent guy, and they're FUN! I also play BZFlag a lot. It's not as "razzle-dazzle" as some more current FPS games but it's pretty addictive.

    Like you, I also haven't had any trouble getting these games to function correctly without fiddling. *shrug* As you say, to each his own.

  240. Not yet... by phorm · · Score: 1

    There is definately a REASON why nobody distributes games in that form for the PC

    Yet, anyhow, and one of the reasons is probably because the idea is much less feasible in the windows-centric gaming world than on 'nix.

    Give it another year or two, liveCD's might become a decent way of gaming on a PC. At the very least the issue could be traced to specific drivers, etc (again, common drivers at the time on the liveCD, only extended ones on the memcard). In the playstation, you can choose "Memory card A, B, etc", so no problem doing the same for a PC I'd imagine.

    And remember, just because somebody hasn't done something yet, doesn't mean that - with a little care and effort - it can't be done in the future!

    1. Re:Not yet... by Keeper · · Score: 1

      Yet, anyhow, and one of the reasons is probably because the idea is much less feasible in the windows-centric gaming world than on 'nix. ...where in the 'nix world, accelerated drivers for modern hardware are non-existant (ie: poor performance). Graphics hardware support is the worst of all -- linux only has drivers for nvidia hardware; not only are the driver's closed source, they can't be redistributed.

      The problem isn't that the gaming world is "windows-centric" -- it's that the hardware the games run on is too diverse.

      In the playstation, you can choose "Memory card A, B, etc", so no problem doing the same for a PC I'd imagine.

      And in the playstation, you know which card slot A & B are. On the PC, you get to randomly pick the one on the left, right, two in the middle, and possibly a few in the back. Or perhaps a device on a USB hub.

      And remember, just because somebody hasn't done something yet, doesn't mean that - with a little care and effort - it can't be done in the future!

      Of course it could be done. I'm not saying it hasn't been done because it's too hard or impossible. I'm saying that it brings more problems to the table than it solves, and THAT is why it hasn't been done.

  241. Will all the requesters buy the linux version? by Nicolay77 · · Score: 1

    I honestly don't think so.

    --
    We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
  242. Yes, no, and maybe..but not in that order... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
    Yes, I mean just like the Gentoo live CD...Pop it in and play away.


    Yes, it's a step backward into the world of dos gamming...but if MS was to sabotage windows [highly possible] then a live CD video game system would be a great alternative. After all, everyone spends all sorts of time tweaking out a system. Why not let the game have the whole thing to itself. I'm sure there could be a way to not reboot between games [virtual machines, etc], or use the game from a desktop. There are too many different Linux "desktops" out there to effectively deal with without simply dictating like this anyway! But, the point is for the game to take care of itself "just like a console" This way a game disc could be written to run on any x86 PC without worrying about Windows or Linux...


    As soon as you get rid of dealing with other software on a computer, getting games working becomes many times easier..well worth the trouble. You'd also have some HDD access for swap, saves, and drivers. Like I said above, the API would have to be extremely well controlled so that drivers and such would work for years on old and new mixes of machines. It'd just require out-engineering MS.. which OSS brags about regularly anyway! This is the "outside-the-box" solution!

  243. Re:directX...never forget by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
    It's not just halo...

    But read what's not being said by the 3d chipmakers. They seem to be afraid of MS retaliation if they get too involved with linux or Mac 3d gaming. Look what happened with Nvidia. Between the lines it looks like MS derailed Nvidia for jacking with the Xbox part contract....nothing offical, but you gotta wonder. MS still seems to be very much in the playing favorites game...more so if they think they can go back to having "competition" with Linux, they may feel the need to "sacrifice" someone as an example.

    Remember that DirectX was supposed to turn Windows machines into consoles...for the most part it did...but MS split the market to make a quick buck. Only after Linux has started making in-roads are the showing a "recommitment" to DirectX to prevent a mass exodus. That and buying up PC 3D patents so nobody else CAN compete if they decide to grab for it all!

  244. Carmack has said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless a special path is written specifically for NVidia cards, they will run like shit. And while you are taking shots at Valve, When's the last time ID has made a game with a good storyline, wait, any storyline. Checkmate.