On Cedega 4.0 And Windows Gaming

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

On Cedega 4.0 And Windows Gaming

Posted by simoniker on Friday July 30, 2004 @11:48AM from the glass-half-empty dept.

An anonymous reader writes "There's a new ExtremeTech article discussing the state of WineX/Cedega on Linux as it relates to Windows gaming. The article suggest: 'As an operating system, Linux has many things to recommend it over Windows. Gaming, alas, is not one of them... We tried Cedega out on three different distributions (and with a bunch of games). The results were decidedly mixed.'"

34 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

like last article... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-07-30 11:51 · Score: 0

but no (nearly) crying about it right?
Doesn't play deer hunting games; who cares? by Jesterboy · 2004-07-30 12:01 · Score: 3, Interesting

I appreciate that they are trying to take into account the "Wal-Mart" class of games by including various hunting titles, but for real PC gamers, who would care whether these run or not? In fact, I almost consider it a bonus that these games don't run...

To be honest, I wish they would've done a little more testing of older and newer titles, across all platforms. It doesn't mean a whole lot if you're testing different stuff on different hardware/OS configurations. Actually, I wish they'd just tested more games, old or new. Pardon me, but I don't think ~4 demos is a comprehensive nor accurate test of how well Cedega performs.
1. Re:Doesn't play deer hunting games; who cares? by elasticwings · 2004-07-30 13:44 · Score: 1
  
  Of course, Walmart does sell Linux computers on it's website. Maybe all their games should be supported someway on Linux. Seriously, you may not play Deer Avenger or whatever. But the truth is, if Linux gaming is to take off, as many games as possible need to run on Linux, including the redneck favorites.
2. Re:Doesn't play deer hunting games; who cares? by Silent1 · 2004-07-31 13:28 · Score: 1
  
  yeah i was surprised when i saw them use demos to review cedega. Honestly i've run bf1942 and bfnam on cedega with no problems at all. God knows how the demos run.
WOW! by will.murnane · 2004-07-30 12:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

gasp! surprise! wineX doesn't run games as well as windows! imo, wineX hurts the cause of developers, who can point to it and say "that's why we didn't develop a linux client! see, it runs!" if noone develops games for linux, noone plays games on linux. repeat. don't use or support wineX if you're interested in linux gaming.
1. Re:WOW! by mahdi13 · 2004-07-30 13:33 · Score: 1
  
  You sound like one of the 'creative individual's that put together a boycot WineX page that has no real proof or facts about why they are boycotting it other then to be a Linux Zealot
  
  Why not a boycot MAME campaign or boycot ANY 'emulator' for that matter? Makes no sense, stop trying to rationalize your dislikes with FUD
  
  --
  "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
2. Re:WOW! by foidulus · 2004-07-30 13:36 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I think the real reason that most companies don't develop Linux ports is that companies probably think that there really isn't a big enough audience that runs Linux exclusively. Most hardcore gamers will dual boot for games. It's a pain in the ass, but hardcore gamers are willing to do it.
  If you want linux gaming, write to the companies, and get others to do so, saying that you are interested in their product, but will not be purchasing it unless they release a linux port.
3. Re:WOW! by black+mariah · 2004-07-30 15:06 · Score: 1
  
  Because there is little to no chance of any 15+ year old arcade games getting a port to Linux, whereas getting ports of curent games and applications is important.
  
  --
  'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
4. Re:WOW! by The+Evil+Couch · 2004-07-30 19:12 · Score: 1
  
  or if you're really interested in linux gaming, get on board with a big dev company and quietly work on a linux client and add it into the final product.
  if your bosses ever ask about it, tell em marketing asked you to do it.
  
  --
  The World's Worst Webcomic!
hmm by DaveJay · 2004-07-30 12:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

It seems odd that they would pick only games and demos that are NOT officially supported by Cedega.
1. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · 2004-07-30 13:22 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe that was the point. Don't buy this thinking you're going to be able to play any games other than the ones they decide to support.
2. Re:hmm by Rallion · 2004-07-30 13:39 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Well, it serves a purpose to do so. I have no reason to even have Linux installed, ATM, since between 10-minute /. sessions, I'm just gaming (If I'm in front of the machine at all). In order to even justify the hard drive space for a Linux install, I'd need to be able to play a lot of games on it, and more than the ones Cedega officially supports. I know the supported ones run, at least, they'd damn well better. It's the unsupported ones that are worth a look.
3. Re:hmm by Incoherent07 · 2004-07-30 17:56 · Score: 1
  
  And here I thought I was the only person on /. who didn't recoil at the mere thought that Linux is not the ultimate solution for every computing use that currently exists.
  
  --
  This is my sig. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.
4. Re:hmm by advocate_one · 2004-07-30 19:23 · Score: 1
  
  "In order to even justify the hard drive space for a Linux install, I'd need to be able to play a lot of games on it, and more than the ones Cedega officially supports."
  
  you have to "justify" the space for a Linux install??? with me, I have to justify the space for a windows install just for playing games on... that's all I use windows for now, just running a couple of games (fs2002 and virtual skipper). Now when cedega gets to the stage where it can transparently run such directX games without them borking, then I can dump the windows partition and complete the transition.
  Everything else I do using Linux... and I resent having to reboot into the windows partition just for a fs2002 session or to play virtual skipper.
  
  --
  Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
5. Re:hmm by Incoherent07 · 2004-07-30 20:02 · Score: 1
  
  Contrary to... well, it certainly seems to be popular here... opinion, if you already have Windows, and you have five working brain cells in your head, it does your web surfing and email just fine. It also does gaming. The latter happens to be a big plus for grandparent and for me. Is that so difficult to understand?
  
  --
  This is my sig. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.
6. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · 2004-07-31 06:26 · Score: 0
  
  True; it shoots the credibility of the article. Harp on the fact that it doesn't support game X, Y, and Z...that's a legitimate complaint.
  OTOH: Not showing any games that Transgaming themselves support -- and picking out games that already run under Linux *without* any form of Wine (UT 2004) -- is not at all useful.
Wine & WineX are nice, but... by Lisandro · 2004-07-30 13:05 · Score: 3, Insightful

...do we really need to focus so much effort on emulating Windows on Linux? Don't get me wrong, Wine/WineX it's cool, and i've used Wine to run specialized software unavailable on Linux (like EE software).

But when you talk Wine, 99% of the time you're talking games. Wine is cool, but most modern games don't run well at all on it; i just prefer keeping a Windows partition handy, or playing native Linux games (which is much better. Games tend to fly on linux). They won't run well anytime soon either, as Wine is always playing catch-up. It's no coincidence that all games that play 100% correctly are at least a couple years old.

I say this because people expect Linux to do *everything* better, even running games for another OS! It's simple, if you want to play the latest Windows game like it should, keep a Windows partition handy. Linux versions are becoming more common lately, but in the meantime, that's the only way to go.
1. Re:Wine & WineX are nice, but... by mahdi13 · 2004-07-30 13:43 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  It's simple, if you want to play the latest Windows game like it should, keep a Windows partition handy.
  Oh yes, that's SO SIMPLE!
  News flash: Not everyone has/runs Windows. It may come pre-installed with new machines but some people skipped the middle man and built their machines. Some people can't afford to pay for a copy of Windows (and refuse to pirate). And some people just don't want to run Windows at all
  
  There is NOTHING wrong with running Windows games on Linux with an "application layer", it doesn't hurt your system and it DOESN'T hurt Linux. Some people are not Frame Per Second junkies and don't mind a few quirks, bonus if it works 100%
  Game companies will not decide to port to Linux because "It runs with WineX", that is an excuse (if they actually say this, I've never heard it). If companies want to port to Linux they WILL. We have Epic and id as very strong backers of cross platform games, and more are following.
  
  Linux games will not be an over night 'killer app', but that doesn't mean we can't enjoy some things. Having Windows on a second hard drive or partition is not an option for everyone.
  
  --
  "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
2. Re:Wine & WineX are nice, but... by Lisandro · 2004-07-30 13:57 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Well, if that's the case; tough luck. Really. Want to play Windows games? Buy Windows. It's not that Wine kills FPS (it doesn't - as a matter of fact), 80% of the games won't run AT ALL. It boils down to that.
  
  Look, i'm not bitching about Wine. It's an impressive piece of software, and God knows it made my life easier more than once. But people like to throw a fit when their *WINDOWS* games don't run properly on *LINUX* - i mean, what did you expect? It's emulation software, for a platform that's a moving target. It will never run as good as the real thing under those circumstances.
  
  Like you said, Epic and iD are doing a great job supporting Linux games, and more are following. In the meantime, if you like gaming, you're more or less forced to have a Windows partiton somewhere. It sucks, but that's how it is.
3. Re:Wine & WineX are nice, but... by Jon+Howard · 2004-07-30 16:05 · Score: 1
  
  ...do we really need to focus so much effort on emulating Windows on Linux?
  
  The thing is, "we" are not doing so... the Wine/WineX teams and their supporters are.
  
  Open source is not a single cohesive entity, and it is not the community's place to tell others what code to write. If they wanna code windows compatibility software, they can. That's what Free Software is all about: choice.
4. Re:Wine & WineX are nice, but... by menetto · 2004-07-30 23:17 · Score: 1
  
  Battlefield Vietnam, Max Payne II are a year old maybe, and they run just fine on cedega. Off course i prefer native games, but if only 2 or 3 % of the computers have linux installed, i don't think the vendors will do much effort for a native linux version. However things are changing: UT2004, Doom 3 and many more are natively supported (http://icculus.org/lgfaq/gamelist.php)
5. Re:Wine & WineX are nice, but... by westlake · 2004-07-31 01:27 · Score: 1
  
  Some people can't afford to pay for a copy of Windows (and refuse to pirate).
  If you can't afford XP Home, how to you manage to scrape up the $50 US you'll need to pay for a legit copy of Doom 3 or one of the handful of other high-profile commercial games that support Linux?
6. Re:Wine & WineX are nice, but... by Dragoon412 · 2004-07-31 01:27 · Score: 1
  
  Can't afford to pay for Windows? You can pick up a copy of XP Home for $70. I've seen OEM licenses as low as $55.
  
  If you can afford the games and the hardware to run 'em on, you'd have to be pretty petty to make an issue out of another $70.
7. Re:Wine & WineX are nice, but... by miyako · 2004-07-31 14:49 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I think your completely off base here, I'll use myself as a counter example. Every machine I own is x86 hardware running Linux (except my Laptop, wich is an iBook running OS X). I have 1 fairly high-end machine I use as my primary desktop machine. A Pentium 4 1.9gz with 3GB ram and a GeForce FX 5900. Now lets say it's a few months from now and the Doom 3 Linux client is available, so I decide I'd like to play it. For $50 I can go out and buy the game, download the Linux client (AFAIK the Doom 3 Linux client will be much like the NWN Linux Client, buy the windows version and then use an installer downloaded from the net to install on Linux). Now I'm playing Doom 3.
  Total Cost to me, a reasonable $50 and about an hour of time invested (driving to the store, back, installation).
  Now let's say ID decided not to release a Linux version of Doom 3, but I still really want to play it. Now I have to go Buy doom 3 for $50, plus a version of Windows, we'll say $80 for WinXP Home. Now I need to buy a new hard drive, say $50 for the cheapest drive I could find. Unfortunately now I also need to get an IDE controller card, since all the IDE slots on my computer are already being used ($20 should do for something not great but ok), Now I have to make sure this IDE card doesn't screw up my Linux installation. Now if I don't want to go that route I'm going to have to back up an entire drive in my Linux box, since Windows will eat a Linux parition. So I'm going to have to install Windows and then restore all my data that I backed up. Now when I boot into windows I need to make sure I'm off the net and download all the windows security patches, and while I'm doing that I probably need to buy an antivirus package to make sure I don't get turned into a spam relay.
  Now how rediculous does it sound to not be able to afford (money and time wise) XP Home but be able to pay for a legit copy of a game?
  
  --
  Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
The problem is that nobody buys Linux games. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-07-30 13:06 · Score: 0

What about that few-year period when Loki made games for Linux, and nobody paid for them, so Loki went out of busines?
1. Re:The problem is that nobody buys Linux games. by mabhatter654 · 2004-07-31 07:15 · Score: 1
  
  but comming out 6 month+! later isn't a linux release...who's gonna buy ANOTHER copy of a bargin bin game at FULL price just to support Linux?
  The better approach is to be like ID...they keep content seperate from the executable...so porting games is JUST the engine...many budget games are too tightly tied to windows to even port w/o rewriting stuff.
  Another cool thing I thing I think people should try is getting budget program and game developers to shift developement to SDL & [Free] Wine as an intrum to full linux development. If you could get budget titles to at least debug their game for wine you'd have a lot of progress! Remember, 75% of the titles on the shelf are cheap 20$ stuff... The other thing would be to get "budget" titles to shift to a GUI tools like GTK+..again, most of them are non-integrated "desktop toys" that don't really conncect to anything...
  Sounds like a job for someone like that Lindows guy...
Got to wonder.. by Turn-X+Alphonse · 2004-07-30 13:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

Why anyone who would be using Linux (Not you're average media following monkey), without knowing this? I've never run Linux (will change next box though) and even I know this.

Next people will be complaining that MS Word doesn't run on Linux. Software is designed to work for a system, it works on that system. It's like trying to put a free into a desert and expecting it to grow..

--
I like muppets.
1. Re:Got to wonder.. by elasticwings · 2004-07-30 14:58 · Score: 1
  
  Although I've never tried it myself. I have read that, with Crossover Office, MS Office actually runs very well.
2. Re:Got to wonder.. by msimm · 2004-07-30 19:54 · Score: 1
  
  Crossover office runs the whole MS Office suite. Its produced by CodeWeavers, who are considered good OSS community members (they give back). Also supported are *some* versions of Photoshop, Illustrator and Dreamweaver (also, of course Iexplorer, Windows Media Player and Quicktime). Personally I always get a kick out of firing up the Internet Explorer.
  
  --
  Quack, quack.
Complaints? by Zorilla · 2004-07-30 20:11 · Score: 3, Funny

I don't get why people are complaining about Cedega 4.0. Why, right now I've managed to get it to successfully run Internet Expl-

error 21: program halted

Damn..

--

It would be cool if it didn't suck.
Linux games are starting to come by agraupe · 2004-07-31 03:43 · Score: 2, Insightful

Doom 3 will have a linux client, UT2004 has a linux client, Neverwinter Nights has a linux client, and that isn't to mention all the good F/OSS games developed for linux. I have a gaming PC that runs only Windows, and I use it to play windows-only games. It works fine, and I can still play some of my favorites on linux. It is clear, IMO, that we should patiently wait for linux games, as they will come, and use Windows or consoles in the meantime.
The 3 games I play are NOT supported by Cedega by FusionDragon2099 · 2004-08-01 15:27 · Score: 0

Simcity 4: Rush Hour C&C Generals: Zero Hour Monopoly Tycoon Frankly, these three games still have a somewhat decent amount of players and there's no excuse not to get them running in WINEX. Not all people like FPS's, Warcraft III and Everquest.