Expert Opinions On Linux Gaming's Future

jg21 writes "Following on from yesterday's Slashdot coverage of the idea to launch a games-based Linux distro, LinuxWorld Magazine has held a Gaming Round Table involving Chris DiBona, Ryan Gordon, Timothee Besset, Gavriel State, and Joe Valenzuela about where Linux currently stands and how it will one day become a premier gaming platform. 'It became perfectly clear to me that most of the technological issues are already solved, and that the others won't take too long to fix once the game publishers really get into the mix,' reports Dee-Ann LeBlanc, Gaming Industry Editor for LinuxWorld, who coordinated the round table. Well worth reading."

Comments

Where's the games at?

[ObviousGuy]

It's nice to talk about creating a "gaming OS", but the key component here is that you need some games.

Sokoban and Mahjongg only get you so far..

OpenGL exists on Linux, what else are game developers missing?

Re:Where's the games at?

[adug]

Unfortunately, what developers are missing is the market. Top notch games are very costly to produce. There is just no way that developers can make money, or even break even with the small desktop marketshare that Linux commands.

There might be some truth to "If you build it, they will come" but in reality, unless there are an awful lot of people clamoring for the ballpark, it's not gonna happen.

Re:Where's the games at?

[LordK3nn3th]

Does the average Joe know how to install the drivers, or even how to turn off X so the drivers can be installed?

Also, ati and Nvidia haven't released open source drivers. It would be so much easier for the average person if the kernel could come with those video drivers already loaded in.

Re:Where's the games at?

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is why we need to encourage developers to start creating games with cross platform in mind. That way compiling the binaries for different OS's including linux and including them on the cd would not really add a huge anount to the budget, but will get more sales with the linux crowd

falvious
Editor
Linuxgaming.net

Re:Where's the games at?

[Doogie5526]

"Carmack is the only reason for OpenGL's survival"

That may be true for games but as for professional 3d apps, OpenGL is king. Likely because of crossplatformability. Since those professional OpenGL cards cost so much (they make the money) and they can just apply the same technology to the game cards is another reason OpenGL is still strong for games.

A 7-syllable word that makes sense! A new personal record!

Re:Where's the games at?

[OneFix at Work]

Umh, OpenGL is really no different, the only difference is it leaves the hardware developers the job of deciding how to support additional features. As for games in todays market, when you are talking PeeCee, you are talking 2 companies nVidia and ATI. Both have their own proprietary drivers for every card made in the last few years.

OpenGL is perfectly fine, not to mention the fact that the existance of OpenGL apps on Windoze makes it easier to port apps and games...but to be honest, the existance of OpenGL on Linux has nothing to do with games and everything to do with 3D Modeling. OpenGL is just how it's done and the fact that there is legacy hardware support for OpenGL means that it will probably remain the low-level standard for 3D Linux apps.

Re:Where's the games at?

[PhoenixFlare]

But what exactly is the barrier to a significant userbase? Linux is free and you can install it on a partition on your HD; you don't have to get rid of Windows to run or even try Linux. So what is the barrier? If you can't even get people to take something for free you know you have a problem.

I think you're missing something - to the majority of computer users, setting up a dual-boot system or doing pretty much anything along those lines is scary, complicated, and unless they have a geek friend or extremely precise help, dangerous to their system(s). Hell, i'm willing to bet that most people don't even understand how data is stored on their drives, let alone the concept of partitions.

And even if you do somehow get a casual gamer to install Linux, what is there to play? Sure, there's Quake, the UT series, NWN, and a relative handful of other games, but that won't keep forever. And that's IF the person even likes any of the games available in the first place.

And the free games included with many distros are in the same boat - as someone said in the previous thread, it creates excitement when you see the huge list available, then it slowly dawns on you that it's (almost) all board/card games and mediocre clones.

Conversely, get more games included like Frozen Bubble and a few others, and there might begin to be a chance of holding someone's interest.

Re:Where's the games at?

[nomadic]

There might be some truth to "If you build it, they will come" but in reality, unless there are an awful lot of people clamoring for the ballpark, it's not gonna happen.

It DID happen. Loki heard the clamor, released a bunch of games, then went belly up because all the people who had insisted for years that they'd buy linux games if they came out turned out to be lying.

Clustered Gaming monster

[Neo-Rio-101]

One thing that Linux can do really well is CLUSTER EASILY. Forget the PS3... as long as games are written to make use of Linux's clustering abilities - we can have some MASSIVE gaming servers and game environments.

Now all I want for Christmas is an Open Mosix release for the 2.6 kernel. :)

Of course.

[LordK3nn3th]

Obviously, we've all heard about UT2003/2004, Neverwinter Nights, and the upcoming Doom III (id Software usually supports Linux well, yay them!)

Even the US gov't is jumping aboard with America's Army (as well as support for Mac).

Linux is growing, and needs to grow more and more in regards to users, so we can get better game AND hardware support. I know some people think this Linux vs. Windows war is kind of silly, but until Linux grows to the point where it's recognizable by the average user we'll still be left out in the cold in many regards (such as, of course, games and hardware).

I admit, I myself still have Windows installed. How else can I play many games? Wine doesn't want to work on my computer, and it's not perfect anyway.

Two Words: Market share.

[Behrooz]

Two Words: Market share.

The games will come if/when a larger proportion of their target market runs Linux.

Right now, very few games are developed for Linux, because relatively few game buyers run Linux. Most game developers don't have the time or resources to port their products, because the margins are razor thin and time is critically important. Windows development toolkits like DirectX are widespread and proven effective.

Until linux is percieved as a major market and has the level of (hardware) vendor support that Windows-based stuff does, it will continue to be an afterthought in game development.

As in console or PC?

[fembots]

Personally I think it might just be a bit easier to roll out a gaming linux console, as it eliminates most of the installtion/setup processes that could be complicated sometiems.

A Linux Game fund?

[Hunzpunz]

I posted this in the last Linux - Gaming - Distro - Thread, but was a bit late. This isn't consistent in itself, but the idea should be clear:

What about setting up a fund for developing a linux game? It should have a concept, only rough, like the genre, set.

Then set up a website with a nice progress bar, and a target sum needed for the developement, like what? 5 Million Dollars? 10 Million Dollars?

Ok, that won't get us a completely new Half - Life - 2 developed, but maybe a nice RPG / Adventure built on an existing engine.

Maybe different Funds for different uses, like
- Make a cool RPG a 'la Deus Ex / System Shock
(Wizardry would be even better, but i don't know about the mass - marketing appeal...)

- "Make a good game developing environment based on Crystal Space"

Make an agreement with some game studio to get a cool engine for a guaranteed price for a free - as - in beer - game production use, let it be the UT or Doom 3 Engine. Or not, depends on the game's genre, i guess.

Let somebody develop a cool game from this money for the community.

If the community wants a new cool game developed, everybody transfers a few bucks to a new proposed game fund of his choice. I think there are enough gnu / linux / bsd / mac etc. fans out there to invest a few dollars each to get a big enough budget, it's mostly a marketing question, i guess.

Kind of like the effort for opening the Blender source?

The fund should be handled by a trusted entity, of course.

It's all about the money (mostly)

[olePigeon (Wik)]

The biggest problem is convincing developers that there's money in it for them.

Most are under the impression that they shouldn't bother with anything other than Windows because there's no money in it. "95% of the market is Windows, so why bother with a poultry 5%" type attitude.

Also, added to the cost is desktop support. If you write a game for just Windows you only have to worry about Windows problems. If you write a game for Linux and Mac OS X, you have to hire, train, and then troubleshoot Linux and Mac problems.

The other problem is to convince developers to NOT design their game around proprietary technologies such as DirectX.

By the way, this information comes from the developers themselves. Personally, I think it's a bunch of crap excuses for lazyass companies trying to squeeze out every profit they can by minimizing responsibility. I'm an avid Mac user but I just recently had to buy a PC just to play games. Counter-Strike, Infantry, and Subspace are Windows only and impossible to play under emulation. However, I'd LOVE to see all my favorite games running under Linux and Mac OS X so I can chuck Windows.

If game developers can't be convinced to even write games for the Macintosh using the above excuses (especially the marketshare one), why would they be at all interested in a desktop that has an even smaller marketshare than the Macintosh?

As a developer...

[Anonymous Coward]

...Linux is a pain to develop a good game client for. DirectX games are not easily ported, and most games are DirectX. This means most professional game developers are fluent in DirectX. DX makes things a lot easier than writing for every sound/video card out there.

Further, Linux editions of games lose money. Quake3 for Linux sold dismally, while people were buying the Windows version enough to be dunking the CDs in their coffee. And the Linux client was released first: if ever there was an opportunity for a killer-app game to help boost Linux, that was a great time.

Loki went out of business by doing the smart thing: bootstrapping itself with porting Triple-A titles from Windows, to earn some cash and develop a library to live on. Who's going to look at the Linux market and see it as viable when id and Loki can't make a good go of it?

And Linux users are habituated to not paying for Linux software, as a rule. Not that they don't, and not that there aren't vertical markets where people are paying good money for Linux apps, but the OSS community is, well, a hard community to pry money out of.

I say this as a developer of Windows games, who runs Macs at home and who has compiled a few Linux kernels in the past. Developers have enough to do to create a modern game while taking advantage of the assistance of things like DirectX: taking on the burden of developing the same thing without that help, for a community that likes their software free (both kinds of free),... that's a lot to expect.