Slashdot Mirror
Does Linux Have Game?
kwpulliam writes "Tom's Hardware has an interesting writeup, discussing the difficulties in bringing games to Linux, and the dilemmas faced by the graphics card developers."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Why can't someone port the Direct3D API to Linux? This would save a lot of hassle of porting the games to OpenGL.
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
Linux has gaim.
Id seems to do a good job of getting their games working in Linux and THEY seem to push the envelope of what gaming IS. If they can do it, I'm sure others can as well. Just as soon as the other game manufacturers get their priorities in order that is. :)
Well, I hate to say it but one of the biggest titles coming to Linux was pre-empted from Linux, OS X, and even Windows in favor of the X-box. Yes, eventually it shipped for Windows and OS X, but Linux was left out in the cold when Microsoft purchased Bungie. Bungie had plans for simultaneous release of Halo on Windows and OS X to be followed soon by a Linux release. That all changed when Bungie was bought out. Honestly given the consolidation within the game industry, I don't see much hope for games on Linux for a few years yet which is sort of odd given Linux's marketshare as being so much greater than OS X. Perhaps Toms Hardware is correct when it comes to Linux being a true desktop replacement?
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
The problem I have is ATI video drivers for Linux. So far they have been a huge dissapointment. My brother has an Dell notebook with an old nVidia graphics card that works much better than my Radeon 9800.
For productivity, I'm using OpenOffice, FireFox and Thunderbird amongst other open source applications. For games, I play Savage (http://www.s2games.com) which has a native Linux binary. I also play some other games like BattleField 1942 and Vietnam that run under Linux through an emulator.
The rate limiting step here is the ATI video drivers. It's the only thing keeping me running Windows XP instead of Linux.
...it's called Tetris. And XTris. And Hextris. And CubeTris. And TrisTris. And GLTris. And...
Clearly, the most dominant platform on consumer computers is going to have the vast majority of games available.
If Linux was the dominant OS, you'd see plenty of games available.
Simple as that.
n/t
They have Linux on computers now?
From LokiGames website: Loki is closed. Thanks for your patronage. Tried & failed already.
Why pay when Linux users use a free OS. Everybody expects their games to be free.
What game companies should do is like linux companies make money: release the game for free but charge for tech support. Of course, when someone figures how to do the MUST-HAVE exclusively on Linux then things will change... not likely.
This is the final goal for open source. They need to become a gaming platform, both commercially and not, if they want to win the war with Microsoft.
Why can't all game developers use OpenGL? This would save a lot of hassle of porting Direct3D. BTW, Transgaming has a version of wine which includes some kind of DirectX API.
Game developers should only use OpenGL for newly written rendering code. It is a high performance, advancing standard. Microsoft often "borrows" from it for Direct X (n+1).
OpenGL makes Linux, BSD, MacOS X and other ports practical as well as not having to deal with Microsoft's arbitrary API's.
In these days, game = 3d video card.
And the support of 3d Video cards in linux is pathetic, only nvidia gives some interest on that, but the main reason is because of the MESS that is the interface to make drivers work in LINUX.
Every year comes a new bunch of video cards, windows get the drivers, LINUX? don't.
If LINUX wants fo compete with windows on ANYTHING, FIX THE DAMN DRIVERS, make it easy to developers, and support commercial drivers well too, manufactures have the right to keep their source in a very competitive market.
Just check any benchmark of DOOM3 in windows x linux. The result is always, linux is slower, and more difficult to install and conigure the drivers.
Not being able to play games on Linux is exactly why I still am running Windows on my systems. I am a heavy (as in activity, not weight) Ghost Recon, UT2004, and Diablo II gamer. I also have Half Life 2 that my wife purchased for me for Christmas waiting for my system to be upgraded, and I'm looking forward to the PC version of Ghost Recon II.
Of course, what do these require? DirectX.
And what's the only operating system that truly supports it? Well, it ain't Linux.
All of the other major apps that I use are open source - Firefox, OpenOffice, CDex, etc. I have my trusty Sun Blade 100 up and running right next to me as well. So, I don't need Windows for all of my normal day to day stuff. I can just as easily run Linux or Solaris x86 for everything but gaming. Now that Linux has greatly evolved towards the desktop, the ability to play DirectX games is the last hurdle to getting Windows off of my main systems.
At its core DirectX is just a set of common libraries. Is there no efficient way to convert Windows/DirectX calls to the equivalent Linux calls? We're no longer in the days of having separate VESA drivers for each video card. Surely, there must be some way out there to develop a functional DirectLinuX. Then again, that's why I'm a system admin, not a programmer.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
but wouldn't it be the next logical step to make a source code translator to alter win32 code to something that compiles and runs on linux? i mean, doesnt a compiler take a line of code, useless in itself to the OS, and translate it to something the OS will understand? how hard would it be to make a compiler that takes win32 code and outputs it into something linux can use... offer that compiler to the developers for free, and they'd be nuts not to release a linux version of every game they make if it was as hastle free as a few clicks.
but im sure if it was as easy as i imagine, it would have already been done.
It's really quite simple, developers won't write for linux while the drivers are rubbish (ATI!), and the drivers will remain rubbish while the developers don't write for linux.
All it really needs is for the gfx developers to commit themselves to supporting linux, and the rest will follow.
Seriously, why aren't more Open Source games developed? I'm not talking Pong I'm talking Halo 2, Doom 3 level. I know the obvious answer is they are really expensive and time consuming to produce. If many of the people working on current games are into Open Source why not show there support by starting serious Open Source games in their spare time. Aim them first at Linux then port them to Windows and OSX later. Seems easier to port the other direction anyway, more video card support etc.
Just a question. If everyone is so serious about supporting it donate the time and start building games that can compete one to one with the big boys. Technically they should be better since it's a labor of love and all the technical issues that everyone complains about, game play and such, should have been adressed in development. Without marketing and corporate suits to consider the games should be able to hit a whole new level and actually lead the pack.
Just a thought.
Folks need to remember that DirectX is much more then just graphics... developers get a standard API for sound (including 3d sound), input (including joysticks/pad/forcefeedback) and networking. Jorgie
Look at Oracle. Did they have a Linux port when nobody used Linux? No, but when Linux started to grow at 30% percent rate in the server market they started to think about it.
Games are a problem of how many people uses it on a desktop, nothing else. And games should be easier to support than a database since in games they spent most of the time in the "data" which depends on the game engine not in the OS, and the game engine can't be that hard with companies like Id. The core problem here is Direct3D but if people starts using linux I don't doubt lots of game companies will consider to create new games in opengl if they can get enought revenue from linux people.
With the current market share linux has is quite difficult to get anything. But if it grows we'll have lots of games, be sure. Heck, just look at doom, halflike, quake. Those games have been ported to linux (or they're in their way), and how much money can they have got those companies from the linux port? Nothing? Or almost nothing, compared with the revenue from the windows clients. That demonstrates that supporting games in linux is not hard, if it were too dificult and with the current lack of interest in the linux port they wouldn't have done it.
From the article:
ATi cards' initial problems with Linux were due to a lack of driver support for Doom III. (...) Regardless of whether a game is based on an OpenGL or Direct3D API, the graphics card vendor's driver must support the game.
Bullshit. What's the fucking point of utilizing any API for any development if you have to have the vendor modify it to work with your product? I suppose that absolutely no OpenGL game ever works under linux without ATI modifying thier drivers to specifically support that game? There's a lot of games out there. Good luck implementing support at the driver level for each and every one of them, ATI.
It just pisses me off to see ATI try to pass this off as id's problem, when in reality there wouldn't be any fucking problem if ATI were make a proper implementation of OpenGL on linux, instead of focusing entirely on D3D/Win32.
End rant. Flame on, and all that good shit.
Wait a minute... did I miss anything (probably), but what's this thing that "Regardless of whether a game is based on an OpenGL or Direct3D API, the graphics card vendor's driver must support the game."?!?
... or not?
The graphics card vendor's API implementation should be complete regardless of the games that use that API. Of course a card could have certain hardware limitations not allowing it to actually support the whole set, but this doesn't look to be the case with Doom3 and ATI.
True, today developers usually choose just one reference vendor for the development process (maybe sometimes because of the money they get rather than the actual lack of time to test on both, cmon there are just two!), therefore there could be some (possibly minor) incompatibilities with the other, but if both vendors' drivers were as complete as possible, that would definitely be a step in the right direction...!
Until someone develops the equivalent of DirectX
(the whole thing, not just Direct3D)for Linux,
developers will prefer sticking to Windows.
Qt sounds right except it is a royal
pain in the ass to use compared to an evolved
API like DirectX.
I first read this article about a week ago on linux.com. What it had to say was correct. They touched on the issues all of us in the Linux/Gaming world have to deal with, such as OpenGL vs. DX flame wars and ATi's horrible Linux support. The one problem I had was when I got the conclusion where they stated
"The harsh truth is that you are not going to get the same adrenaline-charged, bust-them-up, shimmering lake and billowing smoke performance with Linux that you get on WindowsXP."
This made me pause for abit because I didn't see one single benchmark or any sceintific measurements of performance between the OSes.
This also bothers me for I ran ET on my old amd duron 800Mhz with 128Megs of ram on Gentoo perfectly. Now I own a amd64 3400+ that plays quake2 with 100% software excelleration soo smoothly.
Arguments that the Linux market isn't worthy enough for games are beginning to become invalid as more users move into Linux and as the software base becomes more and more "desktop user friendly". As for ATi's support, well thats ATi's problem not Linux's (although a nice LSB would help things out).
Yes, ALL we need is a really well programmed display driver and gfx API for Linux. Many people haven't realised it yet, but NOW we do have the sound driver problem solved as ALSA (Advanced Linux Sound Architecture) was incorporated into Kernel 2.6 series. Now we have a common sound architecture and that's a really good start.
Meh, DirectInput is pretty primitive and could easily be ported to any platform. Hardly any developer uses DirectSound directly, most of the time they use sound middleware such as Miles Sound System, which, if I remember correctly, supports a bunch of different platforms and sound APIs.
DirectPlay is probably the only one of these that is an issue. The Cedega guys have managed to port that as well, though. Now, if they just had a more permissive license!
~phil
Ok, maybe Direct3D is the main GUI on windows but it is of no relevance anywhere else. Not on Linux. Not on BSD. Not on MacOS. Not on the PS2. Not even Windows-CE and therefore not on PDAs and Mobile Phones. Nowhere except Wintel.
Therefore any sane producer should use OpenGL which makes it very easy to bring a product to any console, any computer and after some years to PDAs and Mobile Phones.
Today a productive sellcycle for a game should be:
1. sell on consoles - they have less problems with piracy and people are more willing to pay (overpriced) prices.
2. after the first hot sellcycle - three to twelve months - port the game to Desktop-Computers. There are million people which do not want a console but still want to play a game. Also those games are a bit cheaper which gets you more customers. Your game gets pirated though but as sales for (1.) already are over you simply live with it.
3. Meanwhile port it to Unix-Desktops or in other words, MacOS and Linux. It is a piece of cake, given you planes porting through all cycles means you gave some thoughts right at the start about portability and this pay off now. 10-20% additional sales for maybe 10 working days.
4. After several years portable gameconsoles, PDAs and Cell-Phones are becoming a target - your game outsold on the desktop and consoles, people knew your game and have good memory. People actually are willing to pay for Mario/PDA after having played Mario/Console. So now you recompile your game to those portable plattforms, sell it for a real low-budget-price and most likely you are outselling all earlier sales.
All portings only take some days of work, yes this can be done with some planing.
This cycle and no other will give maximum earnings. And it simply forbids use of Direct3D.
"Life is short and in most cases it ends with death." Sir Sinclair
To get better gaming support on Linux we need more Linux gamers, but to get more Linux gamers we need better Linux gaming support.
It looks like it's been /.'ed so here's the full article text (sans images).
---------------
Does Linux Have Game
Introduction
[IMAGE]
Live out your Unreal 2004 midnight adventures on Linux.
Earlier this year, our Linux Comes to the Desktop article caused a stir, when we stated that gaming on a Linux platform remained a limited proposition. Now it is time to detail why this is the case. We will explore what is the best you can hope for when you opt for the penguin to play Unreal and Doom III. We will also look at why Linux lovers must be contented with the state of things -- for the time being, that is, because things are looking up for the Linux gaming crowd.
So why is wide-scale gaming support for Linux not 100% there? A better question may be: why would game developers spend the money to add Linux functionality to games for a limited number of users? The answer is not that simple, especially since Linux desktop use continues to grow.
There are many reasons why you might want to shift from Windows to a Linux OS. We won't cover what those reasons might be in detail here, but will note that users routinely complain of Windows instability, high prices and many layers of software that impede performance. For others, there are ethical considerations for avoiding Windows, such as decisions by courts of law in the U.S. and Europe holding that Microsoft has illegally wielded its monopolistic influence in the marketplace. On the other hand, there are magazines out there, backed by now-a-word-from-our-sponsor Microsoft ads, that claim Windows XP deserves your money.
According to a report issued this month by analyst firm IDC, Linux "is no longer a niche phenomenon." The overall Linux marketplace revenues for server and PC hardware and packaged software are expected to reach $35.7 billion by 2008, IDC says. Packaged software revenue is the fastest growing market segment within the Linux marketplace, growing 44% annually to over $14 billion in 2008.
On the desktop, IDC says Linux PC shipments are expected to almost triple from six million units this year to 17 million units in 2008. Percentages of PCs shipped with Linux increase from about 3.8% in 2004 to about 7% in 2008. However, these numbers do not take into account the PC units shipped with Windows, to which Linux is subsequently added.
As you can see, the evidence suggests that Linux on the desktop is growing, and that means more PC gamers who will want to be able to frag at will in Linux. In the game console sector, hackers already know that Microsoft's Xbox and Sony's Playstation II also support Linux.
Until Linux does become as pervasive as IDC and other analysts claim it will, what is a gamer who wants to play Halo on a Linux platform do? And why is it such an issue to begin with? Without detailing differences based on benchmarks, we offer a look at the connection between graphics card drivers and the APIs that developers use for their games, and how the interface between the two works and doesn't work with Linux.
Direct3D Vs. OpenGL
[IMAGE]
Doom III shows OpenGL can rock
Whether game developers use Direct3D or OpenGL as their API is the main determinant of whether a game will run on Linux or not. Both APIs are used to create games' 3D imagery, including lines and other shapes, smoke, shadows and all the other good imagery games offer. It has been said that Direct3D is superior to OpenGL, but this is not really the case. While Direct3D is indeed the predominant game API, superior graphics have more to do with the creative skills of the game developers than the choice of API.
Direct3D falls under the brought-to-you-by-Microsoft umbrella, and is geared for the Windows-only world. Because Windows is the main OS in the PC world, graphics card makers have only one OS with which to contend when configuring their drivers for Direct3D games.
OpenGL, meanwhile, is everywhere - it is compatible with Linux, Windows, Unix and Mac OS. But
What if this signature were clever?
Loki Games had a large following among the Linux community. Many people bought games and wanted that company to succeed. There was broad recognition throughout the community that illegally trading Loki games would result in the death of Loki, and as a result there was strong opposition to Loki warez. I really don't think you should place the blame on Linux users when the blame can so readily be placed on Scott Draeker (former founder and CEO of Loki) himself. While it's true that the customer base may not have been large enough to support a Loki games at the time, or even today, the fact remains that Draeker royally screwed his employees and offered terrible customer service to boot. While the programming and engineering staff killed themselves to produce a great product, management stuck it to them and the customers. Then Draeker closed shop, leaving one (far too loyal) employee with a huge credit card bill, the charges of which he took on to help with staff payroll.
Bad management is what killed Loki. And possibly not enough sales to warrant a Linux gaming business. But we'll never know because Loki's books are locked away. It's just as possible that, like with the Macintosh, there's enough of a Linux community to support a small, but well run, games porting business. Hopefully, in the near future, we'll find out.
is probably more about the fact that most Linux installations are on x86, in which case a lot of developers are going to assume that most Linux users are going to dual boot Windows to play games, or at the very least they can run WINE.
So, the real Linux development cost is measured against a much smaller subset of the Linux community, those hardcore users who refuse to dual boot.
Same situation for PPC users running Linux; develop for Mac OS, and let PPC users dual boot to play the game.
Strategically, it doesn't make a lot of sense to develop for Linux yet. There aren't yet enough Linux users who don't have access to Windows or Mac OS.
A better question: does Tom's webserver have game?
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
Yarr! Be ye implyin' that Windows be not a free operatin' sytem, matey? Har har har!
having a game developed for a *nix should require little porting effort to run on another *nix. Meaming the Linux rather than BSD change for MacOS would be moot. And I thought that the PS/2 ran linux? The problem there is that developing a game for linux or windows is secondary to developing a game for x86 or ppc or [insert the PS/2 architecture here] And I suppose warmongering and hipocrisy are integral parts of the american culture, celecbrated and encouraged by most americans (apparently true, as Bush won 2nd time round)
from ps2dev.org I read "Sony are soon to release linux for the PS2." more... "If you write programs for PS2 linux only other users of PS2 linux will be able to run your code. Also be warned that Sony have made their libraries GPL; this means that any programs you write that link these libraries must also be released as GPL with full source code." so PS games == Linux games! so answer the question... Does Linux have game? YES!
"Steve Jobs invented the world" -- Bill W. GATES
I've been thinking about why there's a lack of high-quality open source games. The easy answer would be the huge artistic & etc. effort required, but I'm not entirely sure that's true: just look at the huge number of free (unsure whether Free) mods for Windows games. So the problem actually seems to lie with the engine. We need a high quality (as in, up there with the latest commercial ones) open source game engine first; having it be cross platform wouldn't hurt, either.
Unfortunately, though, games are dissimilar to most other apps in that, for most other apps, you only need one: Windows has MS Office, Linux has OpenOffice.org, for example. For games, however, you need lots of them: Linux has Unreal and Doom, but Windows also has Far Cry, Half Life, and all the rest. So just having good open source games won't be enough unless all the Windows ones suddenly turn open source as well, which is unlikely.
So in the end it's back to the chicken-and-egg situation of the most popular OS getting the most games, and the OS with the most games getting more popular -- Linux will have to gain a larger installed base in other, non-gaming circles first, for game creators to have an incentive to port to it. (Which is already happening, to a degree. It just needs to continue.)
Work is punishment for failing to procrastinate effectively.
Back in Loki's day, the Linux market was a heck of a lot smaller. The economics have changed now. Linux is a much bigger phenomenon. Apple now has OS X, which is BSD.
It's time to try again. This time it will work.
Stick Men
I think this article, while right in its own context, is too graphics-centric and doesn't provide a full perspective on the problem, it's far worse that one can expect from just RTFA.
Sure, graphics are important, but sound, network and input APIs are actually in a much worse situation.
We can argue all we want about how OpenGL is better in many ways and I'd agree wholeheartedly, but Linux's sound, input and network support is just too behind the times in terms "out of the box" functionality or ease of use.
I have been a developer for many years and worked on many platforms, and a common pattern on any serious platform (even going back to the 8-bit days) is that there's complete (granted it's almost never perfect) support for all areas, and DirectX here is no exception, it has by far the best integrated gaming support of any API in existence. Whether it's buggy or low-performance or not cross-platform portable doesn't matter that much. Time-to-market is the name of the game, you want a sellable product and DirectX is the fastest way.
Too often for this kind of argument I receive answers that are ignorant, or uninformed at best, some of them sound like: "But there's OpenAL and it's cross-platform", "udev and hotplug are TEH R0x0RZ", "Linux networking is robust and good enough for servers, therefore desktop performance is guaranteed", "ALSA is better than the Windows crap", "Linux is more stable". Some of them may be right, and Hey! I want Linux to be successful too! But they're completely missing the point and that doesn't help the situation.
We need better API integration, better driver support from chipset vendors (not just graphics, you pixel whores!), BETTER END-USER UTILITIES and some company like Transgaming that can provide a sensible porting/cross-platform middleware solution for developers, not just wrappers for end-users. Criterion's Renderware is a very successful solution for home consoles, one would think there's a market for something like this on the PC.
- Otaku no naka no otaku, otaking da!!!
Yeah, I'm a bit annoyed by that perception as well. However, the truth is they just aren't listing the right framework. I expect that if we just read all these comments and replaced each instance of "OpenGL" with "SDL" we'd have less complaining to do.
Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
1. (a) - Buy a mod chip.
From page 2:
Doesn't support of OpenGL imply support for that game? Or are game makers adding proprietary OpenGL extensions?
What would drive the development of games on Linux is convincing the game manufacturers (e.g. Sony and its PS) to use Linux as the operating system...
You do realize that the PS2 does use Linux as the operating system, right?
Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
I'm not trying to start anything, but if you look at the community that plays console games versus those of us who game on a PC, you have to see that PC gamers are more "geeky" than console folks. As consoles get better (and less expensive), I predict that PC gaming will die. Give it a decade. Thus, gaming on Linux will, IMHO, become a moot point.
Don't be a looter...and yes, I know that it's spelled with an "A" instead of an "E".
There are big problems with selling any kind of commercial windows software to Linux users, and they won't go away with market-share increases:
-Linux users overwhelmingly use x86 machines, and therefore can run Windows easily if they need to. Unless the Linux version ships simultaneously and is equal to or better than the Windows version, all but the most fanatical Linux users will just get the Windows version and have no interest in an eventual port (and the fanatical ones won't want it anyway, see below)
-Even if they don't actually run Windows, Linux users have Wine and usually popular games (ie, the ones that might actually sell enough linux copies to be worthwhile to port) are working under Wine by the time any publisher could ship a Linux port.
-Linux users are ofen averse to paying for software, and/or oppose proprietary software as a matter of principle. So the possible market for a Linux game is further decimated, even after dual-booters and Wine users are taken out of the equation, because of the remaining users some of them will refuse to use anything proprietary and the most of the rest will pirate it unless it is free to begin with.
Under these constraints I can't see how any game developer would waste their time porting to Linux. The Mac market and even the few remaining Amiga users still can get a few commercial games ported, because those users can't run Windows software on their computers and are willing to pay for software.
This is *the* source for great Linux games (both free and non-free, mostly free though). Most games on the first page of this list is really good actually. :)
> What would drive the development of games on Linux is convincing the game manufacturers (e.g. Sony and its PS) to use Linux as the operating system and Apple to use Linux instead of BSD as the basis of MacOS.
Wether Apple uses Linux or BSD as basis for their OS really does not matter at all. For developer they are virtually identical, and there is extremely little effort involved in porting between the 2 (I have done it myself for quite a few programs)
The real issue is Apple using its own gui with its own api, and Linux, BSD and other Unix variations running X + some window manager as gui.
That said, in both cases the api used for 3D is OpenGL, so again this should not be much of a problem for the 3D graphics part of games. 2D graphics (when not done with OpenGL) and input devices are much more of a problem.
Apple wants control over their source and contributions to that source in a way that the GPL does not allow, which makes it at least somewhat difficult for them to use Linux.
So, it introduces extra problems for Apple and is not going to do shit for developers. You do have a point with the desire for an api that is available on both and would satisfy game devekopers, but your suggested solution is not going to solve anything.
It would help a lot more if Apple made the Quartz sources available as GPL, that would allow for a common api for graphics between Linux and Apple's OS X. Seeing how that is also one of their main selling arguments, which they would give away when GPLing it, this is not very likely to happen anytime soon.
A fast api that would be available with X and Quartz would be the second best option.
Om both cases a common api for controllers and other input devices is also required.
Enemy Territory runs quite well on my Linux system
:-).
Yes, it runs great, with nvidia drivers as well. It's also free-as-in-beer, so basically you don't have to buy anything. With all the mods including the now-in-testing True Combat: Elite, it may very well be the only game you'll ever need if you don't play too much
Seriously, you can download it for free so there's nothing to lose. And you'll have one less reason to ever boot into windows again.
Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
Two worries were preventing me from doing it. One was a worry about the inability to send a Microsoft Word format document like a resume in an e-mail, but of course, you have the ability to do that in Linux currently, and I guess for now, legacy Word programs force Microsoft to maintain backwards compatibility. The second worry, a more real one, was games. I knew the latest versions of Doom, Warcraft, Everquest and so forth were on Microsoft and not Linux. This turns out to be more substantial than my vague uneasiness over the ability to send Word format documents (which of course, for now, you can send in Linux).
What I did is install Debian 3.0 ("woody"). I played some games with lightweight graphics capability like Freeciv or Xboard, but then wanted something more hardcore so I downloaded Tux Racer. It was slooooow when I played. Averaging 0.7 frames per second actually. So then I read I needed drivers for my specifics graphics card to get it to a higher fps rate. I began installing the non-free kernel modules for it, but it was unhappy with the versions of some Debian 3.0 packages, especially XFree86 (xserver-common). I was also having some problems with my H-P PSC (Printer-Scanner-Copier) and its Linux drivers because Debian 3.0 had an ancient version of Python and so forth. So I decided to upgrade from stable version Debian 3.0 ("Woody") to testing version Debian 3.1 ("Sarge").
This fixed my HP PSC problems with Python versions. I am still struggling with Mesa, OpenGL and so forth, and right now can not run tux-racer. I have newer version of Mesa then I did with Debian 3.0, but I'm told my newer one is out-of-date by Tux Racer (whereas my older one was not). I haven't even tried to put the special drivers for my graphics card driver in (which needed the newer version of XFree86).
Anyhow, I've been using UNIX since 1989, and have been a UNIX sysadmin since 1996, and getting Mesa/OpenGL packages working on Debian is giving me trouble, I can imagine what it would be like for someone less experienced. Plus, even if I do get Mesa working for Tux Racer, I will have to be fortunate enough to have graphics acceleration support for my card in Linux. And then, even if those two birds get knocked down, how many games are there out there for Linux with those capabilities - Tux Racer? One or two more? What else? I already know that ease-of-setup for graphics is easier in Windows than Linux (system upgrade, then Mesa problem, followed by looking for graphics acceleration support for my card which may or may not be a problem), how does it stack up against DirectX for the same equipment?
Of course, for free systems, one good thing is I can be part of the solution. I have over a decade of UNIX experience, but only recently has my C programming gotten semi-decent (if that - I can write an OK program in a month, but then it takes me a year to debug all the thread race conditions, buffer overflows and so forth I seem to leave about). Even so, it is very daunting for me to feel I can contribute to these sorts of projects. I know a lot about how the Gnutella protocol so I have a leg up on other people looking to contribute to them - but looking over the code and seeing all of the linked lists, pointers to pointers, calls to GLib and so forth, I wonder if I can ever make a contribution to them since unlike full-time developers, I only have the faintest ideas how things like linked lists work. The learning curve to be able to contribute to these projects is somewhat steep in my opinion, although I always hear stories about kids who stumble over some code, begin sending contributions, and begin running some major project while a teenager, like the guy who maintains the Linux 2.4 kernel I run on my machine.
for IIS?
Oh, sorry, wrong topic :-)
"Yes. But does it run OpenGL?"
Bottome line, get a console, or a well defined Unix (OSX!)
but then you get to the end and it just doesn't.
More linux apps/lib adopting elektra would be a step forward in order to see more serious and funny games on linux. More good and accepted standards can only be a good thing to everyone using or developing on a computer. More good standards -> Better accessibility means -> More users -> More developpers -> More users -> Possibility of a game market on linux
DMCA
Copyright Law
Patents
Pick one, they are all the reason why Linux has poor driver support.
If ATI or NVidia would publish there specs on hardware, we wouldn't have a problem.
I for one think BOTH companies are pathetic and do more harm than good writing the crap they put out for Linux in the first place.
If they would open the hardware so we could get a register by register description of what is going on, far BETTER software engineers would be working on excellent drivers, far exceeding those WindowsXP currently enjoys.
If that would happen, then the only thing seperating the driver quality would be the OS implementation and Linux would kick Windows arse.
The biggest problem with these companies is that they are so full of themselves, they HONESTLY believe that they are THE BEST and the only people who could possible write video drivers for thier hardware.
The reality is they are probably the worst and write the software under duress of timelines and contractual intellectual property rules that prevent the highest quality drivers and people from working on the problem.
-Hack
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
Just check any benchmark of DOOM3 in windows x linux. The result is always, linux is slower, and more difficult to install and conigure the drivers.
Heh, nice troll.
Maybe with a shitty ATI card, talk to people who have nvidia cards and run windows and linux, you'll find them loving the speed in linux.
Get back under your bridge.
-- Note: If you don't agree with me, don't bother replying. I won't read it.
As an X700 video card user that's been awaiting decent linux X11 drivers for a few months now (booting into console mode can only be so fun in terms of gaming), I would have to say "no."
sdl wasn't a loki product. sdl's author just was a loki employee at some point
Change 'the' to 'an' and you may have a point. The PS2 doesn't use linux as the operating system in the same respect as microsoft uses a windows based kernel as the operating system on the xbox. Linux on the PS2 is confined to the linux kit, its not like when you are playing a game on the PS2 it's running on top of linux. It's not.
--
WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
Check out the mailing list.
Gee whiz folks, we've got UT2004 with a NATIVE PORT, we've got Doom 3 with a NATIVE PORT (excellent port thank you ID), HL2 plays under Cedega (you need a brute of a CPU tho.) Lots of games with nice installers: Check out http://liflg.org/ for installers for the best games.
People cry that it's too hard to get your video to work; I'm really sorry you were too cheap to get the GeForce Go 5200 and got the Intel "Extreme" integrated graphics and now your pixel shader games look crappy. Nevertheless, UT2004 and the UT2004 DEMO play under linux with the DRI drivers.
Stop complaining, Loki is gone, but http://icculus.org/ is still around, and several of those guys WORKED for loki. If you want it EASY, you want GAMES then either USE WINDOWS or buy an X-Box. If you prefer Linux and are willing to expend the time and energy (and reap the rewards of what you learn) then USE LINUX and play the games that work well, there are a bloody AWFUL lot of games that work, work well and aren't that difficult to set up.
Take a little time, subscribe to http://www.transgaming.com/, make a little donation to http://liflg.org/, buy products from http://www.nvidia.com/ and shut up & enjoy the games!
When you are working on a commercial project and you finish the fun stuff, you keep working on the boring code because its your job and you need that paycheck. When you are working on an open source project and you finish the fun stuff, you just move on to the next project.
The suit : Oh , you want to spend how much porting our game to this open sauce thing?
The geek : hum, xxxxx
The suit : Good good! and how much do we make by doing this potting?
The geek : hum, x
The suit : oh...maybe we could do it with duke nukem forever.
This is probably why iD is able to get away with things like writing a cross platform game and open sourcing their code.
the article basically says: - OpenGL games can look as good as Direct3D games - Linux games use OpenGL - NVidia is the better choice for Linux gamers - Transgaming's Cedega is useful Since these are mostly well-known facts, the article is not worth bothering with (sorry TomsHardware), it contains nothing new.
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
NVIDIA does have alot of third party extensions and other third party IP in their code...so if they open sourced that it would piss off alot of other companies.
Needless to say, I hope one day they can provide a nice driver that doesn't taint the kernel, however I am grateful that they are actually giving us something that is fully functional in Linux (x86, AMD-64) and FreeBSD.
PS2 Linux and PS2 are different you fucking tool.
PS2 Linux can be though of as a game running on the PS2.
The PS2 DOES NOT NORMALLY have an OS.
Wanker.
I know we're focusing on direct3d specificly, but you have to take the rest of the DirectX api into consideration. I think the "All-In-One" aspect is also very appealing to developers. It'd be nice to see something similar for linux. If not we always have SDL :)
This is the reason he is so close to the xbox development. You can do word-processing on a wristwatch, but entertainment drives new technology development. Watch for cell-based Windows Boxes the year after xbox2 arrives.
Does it mean the destruction of Microsoft as a company, or the widespread use of Linux over Windows? And what if Microsoft then put out their own Linux distro? Would there be another war over this? When will it end?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
quite frankly, until I can render Slashdot properly on Firefox on Windows, a task which should be basic, especially compared to writing a video game, i suspect that free software operating platforms are going to languish in the background, particularly with games. This is not a troll or flamebait. I'm just saying, we need to get our own shit together before we start trying to make a windows competitor that's going to get anywhere in the market.
...is Neverwinter Nights. It's pretty good, if you like that kinda thing. Supports everything the Win version does except the intro movies, and you _can_ play those with an external player.
:-/
However, they're probably not going to make NWN2 or other upcoming games for Linux. The initial Linux release did not happen at the same time as as the Windows release, and all the Linux zealots went postal on Bioware. They learned their lesson about trying to support Linux I think from all the rabid flammage they received for their efforts to support our miniscule market. Thanks guys, good job
Listen to the ten-thousand and one complaints about how the video game industry is catabolising itself, how mediocrity rules ["Revenge of Son of NASCAR II" (shamelessly stolen from some other poster... and perfectly describes everything wrong with videogames today, how ironic...)], and the preponderance of clone titles (although I guess 100 different versions of Tetris on Linux qualifies) and the notable absence of titles like HL2 and Halo2 from my videogame library: why aren't there games on Linux?
Oh, I don't know, maybe because the OSS community tries so hard to emulate (that's not punny) their commercial brethren even when their goals aren't even remotely similar, or are so caught up in the political ideology that the idea of making a closed source, for-profit game to run on some OSS is foreign.
With most of the smaller developers bitching about how they can't compete with the likes of EA for resources or shelf space, here is a wide open market just begging to prove game theory correct. Here is a chance for someone to bring a title to market just as they envision it. Here is a chance for newbies to cut their teeth.
Here's an idea: release a solid (not blockbuster) title for Linux only. And when you are done, release another one. And another one. And another one.
Got a shortage of ideas? Look to niche markets, like war games or sims. Most gamers harbor some secret fantasy of games they wished they could create if they could put down the controller long enough to learn how to code (mine being football as a battle sim, or an online version of Illuminati, or some mutant child of Civ, Neo-nectaris, and Fallout; or Bizzaro- an side scroller featuring and spider-like eyeball ment to pay homage to the Tex Avery sight gag, or...). Talk to your audience.
Then you got a respectable library of games, and some geek speaking in hushed tones "Middle Earth Football for $20. And they're giving the OS away for free..."
Waiting for the games to come to you isn't going anywhere.
*cracks open his "Linux for Dummies"*
Maybe someone posted it already, but anyway...
1 94 363
People should stop making excuses and simplay look at the facts about why there are hardly any (native) games for Linux.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=20503&cid=2
Especially be carefull about this comment from JC:
All linux games sales EVER don't add up to one medium selling windows title. We are one of the creditors that aren't likely to see money that Loki owes us, so we have some idea just how grim it is.
That isn't saying that it can't change in the future, or that doing linux ports isn't a Good Thing, but it isn't an economic motivator at the present time.
Linux really needs to get it's act together graphics -wise. I think then we'd see much more interest from the graphics hardware companies, and also the game developers.
At the moment, there doesn't seem to be any agreement by the different folks (X devs, KGI/CGI devs, fbdev, dri, etc) on what the future is. Surely 3D accelerated X drivers is not nearly as sane as a consistent entirely kernel-space graphics driver architecture. This is where Linus seems to be wanting to go on the matter...
Another thing I'd like to know, is will Linux long-term be allowing closed-drivers to link into the kernel? At the moment, Nvidia has to hack around the kernel being GPL. Perhaps LGPL would have been more saner (can't be helped now, though). Perhaps there could be some kind of LGPL'd generic driver architecture? Would that even help? I don't wish to argue about whether or not all things should be FOSS, but I personally don't mind using closed drivers, so long as they work well, when there is no alternative.
How can Linux possibly be taken seriously in the game industry as things stand right now!?
I suspect Halo has become so big mostly because Microsoft marketed it so much. I'd rather have Quake or Doom or Half Life.
SDL is still around. It's a very nice little library. It can handle 2D graphics (and 3D though OpenGL). It handles sound, networking (I think), timing, input (mouse, keyboard), and some other things (like finding and accessing CDs). It is very nice to program in. I think it's even used in some real commercial games (but I'm not sure). It's what I like to program in (as a library). Makes game development easier (MUCH easier) than if I had to implement all that stuff (input code, WM code, sound code, etc) and it's cross platform to boot. Windows, OS X, Linux, and more!
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
That's bound to change, though: Linux makes a lot of sense for home users.
Sort of.
IANA Graphics Programmer, but as I understand it, all the production drivers implement the base GL spec, but some implement more or less of the various extensions to the base spec. nVidia in particular add a lot of extensions to their drivers, some of which are valuable to games programmers. If these a game is coded in such a way as to require these extensions, and the driver in use doesn't implement them (whether by banging on the hardware, or by providing a slow software emulation), you're SOL.
If you run glxinfo on machines with different video hardware and/or drivers, you should be able to see the difference in the extensions they provide. Here's the output from a machine with a Radeon 7500 using the standard Free drivers from kernel 2.6 and X.org 6.8.1:
yes, it's used in real commercial games. Neverwinter Nights' linux port uses SDL instead of DirectX.
Still havent heard of a commercial game using it on windows though.
"How fine you look when dressed in rage."
Nothing else needed.
-=-=-=-=
I know life isn't fair, but why can't it ever be un-fair in MY favor!?
..your mom.
Some years ago I abandoned Windows on the desktop and switched entirely to Linux. I bought every game from Lokigames with the exception of Eric's ultimate solitare. (I hate solitaire). I purchased Unreal Tournament and other linux compatable games and wrote on the cards "PURCHASED FOR USE WITH LINUX" on the cards that I mailed back.
Problem was, as an advocate (zealot?) I could not play Half-Life with my friends, and they were all into Half-Life. Now, don't tell me that you can run Half-Life on Linux by doing this or by doing that... I know all the things needed to make it work (it works now much better than it did then). However, it really never worked on Linux, or at least I should say it BARELY worked. I certanly could not use it for deathmatching.
When Q3A came out, I bought a Matrox card specifically because of the Linux compatible drivers, and their support of Linux. But Q3A did not run all that great on my machine, even if Linux did have a higher FPS at some of the more esoteric resolutions (Like 640X480 or LESS).
Now, as I type this, I am typing from an XP machine. It is not nearly as stable as I would like - nothing like the non-gui server I have next to me running RH 6.2 (Never bothered to upgrade it, it is still running just fine thanks.) I work on Linux all day, and I now do all my work with Putty to connect to the servers I work on. I am considering going back to Linux on the desktop for browsing, email and chat as I have been having stablity issues with XP and my DVD burner. However, I like my games, and I like playing them well. Furthermore, I like having the highest FPS and quality settings avaliable.
I use my computers as a tool, and when I get home and I want to play Counter Strike Source, Desert Combat or America's Army with my friends I use Windows XP. Don't tell me that these can work on Linux - I already know - and I don't care. I wasted too much of my time in zealotry trying to get some of my older games to run as well under Linux as they do on windows. I don't love XP - but it runs my games. You see, I like Windows for the ability to play games with my friends. I like Linux to run as a server and have the stability and power that a server should have. I don't use Windows servers myself, and I dont use Linux gaming machines. I would like it to change, but when I get home after work, I just want to game with my friends. I have no desire to poke a Linux box more. I get paid to do that at work, I dont want to do it at home.
Would I like to see it change? Sure, but it won't happen for some time if it does, and I have better things to do with my time than be a zealot.
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
Descent 3
Heretic 2
Heroes of Might and Magic 3
Myth 2
Railroad Tycoon 2
Simcity 3000
Serious Sam: The First Encounter
Serious Sam: The second Encounter
Return to Castle Wolfenstein
Quake 2 (with Ground Zero and the Reckoning)
Quake 3
NeverWinter Nights (with Hordes and Shadows)
Doom 3
This list is just the software currently installed that I have purchased to play in Linux. I know there are a lot of people out there who buy a lot more games than I do, but I think I've done a reasonable job of not expecting all my games to be free. I do have tons of excellent free software games (and some crappy ones), a number of commercial games that were later released as free software or freeware, and a number of commercial games that I have purchased like Warcraft II and various Sierra and LucasArts games that I play with substitute engins like ScummVM and Strategus. Frankly I think there's probably a higher percentage of people in the Windows gaming world who expect their games to be free (since they warez them) than in the Linux gaming world.
I don't think the release the game for free and charge for tech support model will work all that well for games. However, releasing the game engine for free and charging for content could work. Or charging subscription fees for MMORPGs, for example.
Maybe we don't need game companies at all: there are lots of good, non-commercial games for UNIX/Linux already, and more and more are being created.
Loki makes a bad example, cause as far as I tracked it, it was more a typical example of mismanagement, then of inability to sell enough titles to cover costs.
Ofcourse, noone feels like filling the hole after the first went down, bad precedents make people nervous. However I'm one of those people who would buy native games for linux if they could get them. So it's rather annoying really.
Quickshot
i love the way they just ignore the fact the reason we cant have open source drivers isnt because of a lack of people/desire but because they woulnt release the specs.
if im buying graphics hardware{1} then it would be nice if i didnt need to have someone elses binary siting in my kernel just to make it work. im not some open source zelot but 3d party stuff isnt going to be as well tested and could cause probs, they give arguments about secrecy etc but amd/intel are just as competitive and let each other see the designs
{1} which is basicly limited to nvidia since ati is just not an option
It's a chicken vs. egg problem from the feeling I get from people(myself included). Bring games(good, mainstream, "Triple A" titles) to Linux and people will start using Linux. Bring people to Linux and game makers will start producing/porting games to Linux.
They couldn't fix my brakes, so they made my horn louder.
well,what I say is seeing that windows comes with every new computer it's not a problem. My understanding is that linix is a program like doss -now do we really want to go back to that. We should all soport the good work of microsoft.
Neverwinter Nights, which I _bought_ specifically to use for Linux. It was nice to see something brought over that wasn't a FPS...
Why am I not rapping? I am rapping with you in a way.
'Does Linux Have Game' article complained about the cost of driver developer development and GPL issues. I know I'm a zealot, but I'm right-- Nvidia wouldn't have to do all the Linux driver work if they'd give the spec away. The community will do it, there will be no GPL violations. In return, the company is praised by all the FOSS zealots, and a community of developers _and_ stable driver code begins to emerge.
Will it ever happen? What of the risks of intellectual property loss from the opening of the spec? I don't know. Any ideas?
Funny you should mention that, but I recall seeing SDL .DLLs in the directories of a number of Windows games I've played not so long ago. I think Warcraft 3 might have been one, although I'm not sure; I know for sure that it used Freetype, though, which is interesting/cool. SDL might not replace a lot of the heavy lifting DirectX does better with all of its hardware accelerated drivers and fancy features, but I'm sure if you're aiming for a portable program you would make use of SDL's features that are less performance critical, like input for example.
No. :)
A perspective on the market in China, from a blogger in Shanghai with a middle class income or higher:
Personal computer's price are still not lower enough for people as TV to them. Computer costs 4000 - 6000 RMB, which is about 2 or three months' salary. Here is how I see the market: people with university education or higher tend to have a computer at home. People with a child older than 10 tend to buy a computer. Others may not want to spend $$$ on computers...Good Internet cafe charges 5 RMB or higher (per hour, about $1.25 US.) Internet at home is still relatively expensive. China Internet Market Analysis
I assume these Chinese systems are roughly equivelent to the $500 entry level HP Pavillions sold at Walmart. Not gamer specs by western standards. You can clone Bejeweled endlessly, but you probably do not have the domestic base to warrant investment in projects like The Sims or Half-Life, asssuming you can slip them past the censors.
It is much harder to export culture than technology and it is popular culture that drives game design and sales, not the O/S. The United States and Japan are good at exporting culture, China is not.
You mean keep doing what the mass majority of gamers have been doing for years? Its that kind of attitude why Linux is so heavily shunned by casual gamers. Most people are not willing to expend the time and energy and reap the rewards of what you learn just to get UT2004 running in Linux when they can use the auto-installing and play it on Windows. People want EASY. People don't like having to change their video settings everytime they want to play a certain game.
The masses don't like to get told, 'you should learn our complex and difficult methods to achieve the same results using your simplicitic and traditional ways.' Its like telling the American people that the electorial college is inferior (and in a way it is) but even if its true, people aren't going to go along with it for the sake of ease. (Do you REALLY want to spend the time and effort necessary to constantly remain updated and educated on what goes on in the government while having a job/family/school/social life/playing video games/reading Slashdot/etc.?)
So, you're the owner of a games development company.
Looking to invest a few million dollars in developing / porting a good set of games to Linux, you decide to first check out the demographics of this potential market. This site 'Slashdot' should provide a nice snapshot of people. After all, isn't it one of the public cheering-houses of the O/S? Now, what does that hypothetical company owner see on the message boards:
"It's not STEALING!!!! It's Copyright Infringement!!!"
"Software WANTS to be free!!!!!!"
"Piracy is victimless!!!!!!"
"I was playing Doom III LONG before it hit the shelves!!!!!!!"
And you guys wonder why companies aren't rushing to produce games for the private user Linux desktop market? I thought y'all were smart!
Which emulator are you using to run BF1942?
You must look at it from a marketing perpective;
There are xyz Linux users, from this procentage there are xy Linux users who play games. From this xy procentage, there are x users who would actually buy the game. And as JC already pointed out, there really isn't a marketing reason why you would port games to Linux. Hell, even if it's a AAA title, the porting alone could cost more than you would actually get back.
I setup gentoo (KDE + all the usual apps) on a non techincal females computer who was fed up with Windows. She used Matlab, OpenOffice, k3b for burning cd's, XINE for DVD and the usual. The interface was easy to use, Firebird fills the IE gap and she hasnt used windows in over a month. She made an effortless transition over night. However she is an avid gamer. She likes her Warcraft games (All the latest Warcraft games). She bought cedega subscription and has NOT had a single problem!
Look at cedegas compatibility list. Any game with a 4 or above rating runs perfectly! Linux has PLENTY of games its just a lack of native support that I hope comes soon.
I DONT have to talk about Nvidia linux support (we all know its top notch) and I have faith in ATI that they will by summer have a SOLID driver released. They really are trying and they will get it right.
Linux has game.. and not just game but ZERO viruses, crashes, less bugs, more security I mean the list goes on.
Linux TRULEY is the greatest... and this is WHY I renew my FSS subscription every year.
pathetic
really pathetic wanker moddder
1. Port a game to Linux
2. ???
3. Profit!
Direct3D (otherwise known as D3D) is simply Microsoft's answer to OpenGL- period, end of story.
What you're referring to is DirectX which is the framework comprising:
DirectPlay (networking), DirectInput (keyboard/mouse/joysticks), DirectSound (sound (duh...)), and DirectGraphics (2D rendering).
In each of these there's an analogous or similar platform under Linux and MacOS (which, amazingly enough, are the same things...).
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
...it failed because of excessively BAD business decisions by Loki's executives (Look making 50k copies of a title and 50k special tins and then delaying the damn thing because the tins were tied up in US Customs is a BAD business decision no matter how you slice it- and that's what Loki's execs decided to do on Q3:A for Linux and it's why in the hell it didn't sell well over anything else. People could buy the Windows version and "patch" it to be the Linux version with no real effort or tracking of those sorts of sales.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
The reason why linux will have a problem getting games is because of the 'Casual Gamer'. The casual gamer generally does work on their computer, and only occasionally plays games. The thing is, they don't want to mess with their computer, they just want it to allow them to get stuff done, including the games. This would seem to make them want to use linux, but it instead pushes them away. Why? Because windows works 'good enough'. XP and win2k both are relatively stable compared to win98. As for security, they would rather not mess with that as well. So what does this mean for linux? It means that dual booting isn't going to happen, because it is too much work as soon as a single peice of hardware doesn't come automatically configured, if they even bother to mess with it at all. Security? The last thing these people want to do is have to care about that. They DO NOT want to admin a linux box, its not worth messing with. What about their productivity software? Sure, you can get OSS replacements for most of it, but that STILL entails getting used to a bunch of new software before you can get back to 'using your computer as a tool' as many linux advocates like to say. So, its a simple equation: take the time and effort of learning and installing linux + time to learn new software, and compare it to the effort and time of making the windows box 'good enough' by installing norton and zonealarm and occassionally updating your computer. Linux loses, big time. What linux needs to work on is making itself as user friendly as possible, to help balance that equation. So, anyone feel like copying OS X?
...aren't all they're cracked up to be. If you code to DX8 you're largely coding to features of a Radeon R200 or better. Sure, your cards "support" it, but the features of DX8 was that of the ones initially offered only by ATI products. DX9's NVidia's playground and so forth.
It's not really a standard save by Microsoft- everyone else uses OpenGL, even MS offers it. That, my friend is the definition of a standard.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
It would be nice if once, just once someone would benchmark DirextX bases games running via Cedaga!!! Give us something we can use! Tell us good configs, to improve the experience!
They came for the Communists, and I didn't object - For I wasn't a Communist; They came for the Socialists, and I didn'
Now, this is my opinions and should be viewed as such...
There's instances where it strongly appears to me that they've sold out. There's also repeated instances where they just-don't-get-it and spout personal opinions rather than facts. Sometimes they get it right, many times they don't- the only reason why they're still a going concern is that people haven't twigged onto these little facts about the site and they get it all right enough to be "useful" to most people.
Nowadays, I give more credence to AnandTech (Though Anand has missed on a few things himself of late...) and [H]ardOCP (Hi, Kyle! In his case he clearly states things that are merely opinion as such- I can deal with someone stating something is opinion, I can't deal with people making opinions as statements of fact...)
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
...OpenAL is used in commercial cross-platform games such as Unreal Tournament 2k3 and 2k4. They use their own framework for the other pieces most probably because they feel they need finer-grained control than SDL provides or they produced their own framework like SDL that they're happier with.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
That would sum up things nicely...
The game developers won't make Linux versions because they don't see the market and the driver support's still "not there" for them.
The hardware vendors won't make Linux versions because they don't see the market and the game developers are largely not making games for the platform.
The end-users aren't there because the hardware's often lagging Windows and there's less games for Linux (Never mind that most of the games that are "out there" for Windows are crap to begin with...).
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Tom's Hardware did some benchmarks awhile back -- q3a on Win2k, q3a under WineX (now Cedega), and q3a under native Linux. Identical hardware. Guess which was faster?
Native Linux > WineX > Win2k.
That's right, the native Windows version was faster under Linux than under Windows 2000.
The real obstacle is trolls like you.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
It's very surprising to see Tom's hardware deffending a good cause. In the past I have grown accustomedd to their incompleate and very biased reviews and a degree of disinformation but this time they have done a pretty good job. Still there are quite a few other factors that should be pointed out like the general anti-linux atmosphere and fear towards linux created by the M$ press people.
...
Funny how even though linux is supposedly no threat to Windows they are using every cheap trick in the book against linux.
Damn you ATI and your crappy linux driver!
Currently Linux performs about %15 better than Windows in Doom III with any version of the Current stock of NVidia cards including the high end. Has anyone noticed/mentioned that? Why is this not mentioned in the artical.
This reason alone would make me boot into Linux to play games...
MOUNT TAPE U1439 ON B3, NO RING
Followup: The confusion may have resulted from the fact that the PS2 development system ("TOOL") is linux and a gnu toolchain.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I know that there aren't that many games to play on linux but I just wanted to let you know that one game you guys can play is our Doom 3 Mod Last Man Standing because we plan to make sure it works under linux. The mod will feature single player and multiplayer. The basic idea behind the mod is to try to survive against hordes of monsters. We just released a beta so check out the readme here to get the full details.n _Standing_ for_Linux;35449e surge.net Channel #lms-mod
http://doom3.filefront.com/file/Last_Ma
(there is a windows installer too if you want that, check the links in the upper right)
I really love linux, it is my OS of choice and both of my coop coders use it, so there will always be support for linux from our mod. At the very least the mod is something you can play till more games offer linux support. I hope you enjoy.
-calimer
http://lms.d3files.com
irc.gam
Please visit Slashcode bug #981137, which concerns automatically hyperlinking URLs in "Plain Old Text" mode, and add a comment to show your support for a speedy resolution. No progress has been made on this trivial feature request for longer than six months.
Bzzzt, try again. It's more like a slice of $37,500,000,000. Equivalent to the current game market. I'll quote parts of the article, so you don't have to read it all:
why would game developers spend the money to add Linux functionality to games for a limited number of users? The answer is not that simple, especially since Linux desktop use continues to grow.
There are many reasons why you might want to shift from Windows to a Linux OS. We won't cover what those reasons might be in detail here, but will note that users routinely complain of Windows instability, high prices and many layers of software that impede performance.
Linux "is no longer a niche phenomenon." The overall Linux marketplace revenues for server and PC hardware and packaged software are expected to reach $35.7 billion by 2008, IDC says. Packaged software revenue is the fastest growing market segment within the Linux marketplace, growing 44% annually to over $14 billion in 2008.
Bling, Bling! Let me demonstrate what's going on here and why Windoze is a loser. I can go out and buy a big_name or I can build my own computer for gaming. If I buy the big_name, it's going to come all nice and configured with Windoze and ready to roll, but it will set me back about $1,000. I can get the same kind of hardware from a no name or parts market for about $450 to $700, depending on how stu^H^H^H much I want to pay for a video card. Even if I'm stupid, I can get a hell of a lot better hardware on the parts market for less money. Then, I can buy windoze, pirate windoze or use free software. Whether I pirate or buy windoze, I still only have a four minute halflife online, that's FUCKING UNACCEPTABLE. With free software there's now a chance I will be able to play. Bang for the buck is going toward Linux in a big way. If I want to play games, Microsoft is the expensive and expendable middle man.
What I'd love to see is live game CDs. I'd pay good money for that, and trust me, I've got plenty I have not been spending on $100 operating systems that suck.
Let me paraphrase Gandhi:
That time has come. I think the $37.5 billion estimate is low. Gamers have traditionally driven PC hardware markets and gone to pains for their pleasure. Linux is now about as easy to set up as Winblows and is much easier to keep up. Companies that ignore this to stay in M$ clutches are going to lose out big time.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Mods on crack... again -- depite the parent being a considered a troll* they mod a contextual reply off topic, to a +5 funny If parent is offtopic, then Grandparent was off topic too...
Note to crack using moderators: karma bonus was used so that people could see parent.
*= in this case it seems** like he's only _considered_ a 'troll' for being a misfit and having 'negative' karma.
**= I'm not a subscriber, so I can't see his whole posting history, he might have been a hardcore troll, but lately he doesn't seem to be trying.
It might feel good
It might sound a lil somethin
but Damn the gaim
If it don't mean nuttin
What is gaim who got gaim
Where's the gaim
In life
Behind the gaim
Behind the gaim
I got gaim
She got gaim
We got gaim
They got gaim
He got gaim
It might feel good
It might sound a lil somethin
But fuck the gaim
If it ain't sayin nuttin
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
The last thing quoted is the only thing that makes sense to me, chipset support is needed but not from vendors. Live CDs like Knoppix, which typically find and make everything work perfectly despite lack of chip maker support, should convince you that the only problem is with chip makers who refuse to share information. Knoppix spins up in a minute or so. Getting Winblows to work as well typically eats hours of time downloading drivers, patches and all that and it's never "perfect" or ever over. Winblows to me is a four minute half life pain in the ass.
If you want to sell me a game, stick it on a live CD. I've been winblows free for years now and I'm hungry for games. I've got plenty of money for your game that I have not spent on Winblows or big name computers. Make it happen and people like me will be there. Hell, I'll even set aside a nice little partition for you. What's a CD cost your company, 0.005 cents? Try a nice little $5 game like Leisure Suit Larry and advertise it here on Slashdot to see what kind of market there really is.
As a side note, I have also notice some of your "typical" responses on my own. ALSA does rock as does KDE's arts deamon. Linux is more stable and it's networking performance is dramatically better. I'm a CS zero, but I've got four computer up on a home LAN that WORKS. A Winblows set up would have cost me a minimum of $400 and half that many computers used to cost me five times as much time dealing with bugs. Linux is CLEAN and when it works it works much, much better.
Really, I want to play games and I'm willing to PAY YOU MONEY for it. As much a Zealot as I am about free software, games get a special pass. Just look at my posting history, I've got a M$ fan club. So long as you don't fuck my installs, and I get to play, I'm happy. Good luck, and I hope to see your CD out there.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
That is the primary reason developers choose DirectX over OpenGL at this point. Both graphics APIs are feature rich, but only one of them goes onto a console system.
OpenGL is cross platform, but DirectX gets you onto the PC & Xbox.
It's funny to me that Toms Hardware seems to miss this entirely... the id software folks themselves have indicated that this is a compelling reason to use DirectX.
You can always tell what apps use wxWidgets...the ugly ones.
I wrote an analysis of this article and proposed a possible solution to it. Blog entry can be found here.
Even though 99% of these guys will never go on to make a major commercial game, their existence along with the 1% that do move on are a critical part of the equation about what direction devs will want to do in the future. If you can't convince these n00b devs to design for cross-platform stuff now, either due to a lack of convincing/knowledge or good tools, what will make them want to use anything besides Windows in future(besides the money related to market share)? Linux needs these guys and their nearly inconsequential games if it wants the mass-market stuff in the future.
If I'm going to drop 5 million bucks on developing a game, seems to me that I would want to use the API that gets me closer to XBOX. XBOX is already running Windows, already running DirectX, and so, if all I gotta do is tweak an existing app and then I can ship for a very lucrative XBox market, why would I bother with OpenG/L?
This is my sig.
Reason Not required Direct3D version 8 runs under Opengl Direct X 9 translation under development.
Why have two sections of code.
Opengl runs on Windows Mac And Linux.
Linux bigest problem is that Default opengl on windows is 1.2 default opengl on linux is 1.5+ and better. Hmm what is the problem here. 1.5 takes a lot more processor to create. So in software mode linux is slower but the graphics are better. Game developers need to allow for this with good reductions in required specs.
Some of the problem on linux is not the graphic cards or drivers. Is that windows Direct X has a kinda speed control that linux does not. Ie it reduces graphical Qualty to keep speed.
If I write a shareware application, I can use a windows installer for visual studio and build a wizard that handles the installation of my application. I don't even know where to start with Linux. What version of C libraries, what version of the compiler, all that stuff, and, then, worrying about whether or not full screen or sound access requires root access? Like, I'm going to walk a 10 year old kid through that? Yeah, some kids are computer smart, but, a lot see them like toasters.
Make a Linux distro that can play games with the efficiency of an XBox, so you can
a) easily install games and remove them.
b) works solidly with exact pc specifications - this motherboard, this graphics card and this sound card, (no component based substitution), and you got yourself a winner.
The moral of the story is the idea of interchangable peripherals for consumer pc's has failed. Remember how reliable those old ataris, amigas, macs, etc all were? Slots are a design mistake.
This is my sig.
Lets face it, people that think gaming on linux will ever get anywhere are living in a pipe dream world. Thinking Linux gaming is ever going to match PC's especially when PC gaming except for the few triple-A titles is going out of style in a big way because of modern consoles (read: Xbox, PS2, Gamecube). Also to top it off the internet has made it insanely easy to pirate PC games in record numbers online.
Just what makes you think that any sane commercial developer will want to make games run under the already losing steam PC gaming market? If anything more and more developers are going console only and saying goodbye to the warez fest that the PC is. Only really high profile games can survive on the PC, or games that have a legacy and history of sequels already established.
Almost every PC game worth playing is a sequel to another game or a port of a console game, or a multiplatform title like NFSU2.
With video card prices at record highs and new cards coming out every year for $300US or $300-400CDN dollars. PC gaming is a friggin expensive hobby and the graphics card companies are the ones to blame for making the market for 3D games increasingly smaller and smaller. It is becoming less and less appealing to want ot invest the insane amount of money you have to in a PC to just get a selection of games that is DWINDLING ever year, playable.
In framerate comparisons between the Windows and Linux versions of Doom 3, Windows won hands-down. The guy at id who manages the port stated quite simply that GCC does not optimize as well as Visual Studio .NET. GCC and Linux is simply not a viable performance platform at this point in time for high-end engines.
PC game sales have had a steady decline in sales over the past few years, while console sales have increased at an even faster rate.
Hunt your preferred prey at Aliens vs Predator MUD. Join the war at avpmud.com port 4000
Today a productive sellcycle for a game should be: 1. sell on consoles
Given that the console makers will talk only to a developer with a published PC title, how would you plan to get started in that field?
It is worth noting, that for a desktop OS to survive in the long term, it needs games!
The reason for this is simple. Just as a country's most important asset is its children, so too an OSes most important asset is its new users. Without new users, any OS would quickly crumble. And what's the best way of getting newbies to flock to your OS? Good question, but games would be my first answer.
Everyone begins life as a clueless newbie. Yes everyone! From Anonymous Cowards to Stallmanesque gurus. We all learn our skills bit by bit, and computer games play their part. Through playing and using computer games and other "lesiure" applications, like instant messengers, P2P apps and browsing "kewl" internet sites, the clueless newbie slowly learns new skills and gradually evolves to a script kiddie and onto the 311t h4ck0r!!11 and then onto regular tech head status. Those that don't, simply become more proficient and comfortable with their OS, and hence the OSes future is secured.
I think that games play a vital role in the lifecycle of a mainstream OS. I can safely say that because of games, I learned the basics of computing years before I would otherwise have. As a simple example, consider solitare and minesweeper. Sure they cost the economy millions in lost time, but without them millions more would be wasted training people how to use the mouse. Give anyone solitare to play and they will be a wizard with the mouse in half an hour. Aunt Tillies included!
A trivial example perhaps, but give a teenager Doom III or Command and Conquer, and they'll soon grasp extremely basic concepts like, "You need to save your progress", "Your files go here", "Computers (AI) are not smart. Computer needs to be told what to do" and "You need to install a program to get it to work". Seem absurd? Ask any Helldesk frontliners if they'd like their users to know this. Simple basics, but many may go on to download patches and updates (users familiar with updates!!), expierience crashes (computer isn't "broken") , fiddle with ini files, or even mess with the ingame console commands, if they exist. The social aspect of computer gaming is also helpful, as young people will learn quickly if some 311t is scoffing at them because they cannot zip a file (many teenagers can't you know). And so they learn. The regular PC gamer considers him/herself a regular whiz at the computer, is much more comfortable with their OS, and will need far less training in later life. Neat eh?
But there's a downside to eight year olds being able to email and browse the net. They learn on one OS, and guess what OS they'll gravitate towards in later life? Windows will be dominant for the next 30 years! At least! Why? Because an entire generation has grown up on windows games, windows messangers, windows emails and windows apps! A whole generation! These users view Linux as a scary, dark place filled will danger and elite hackers, just as new windows users view ALL computers as scary, dark places filled will danger and elite hackers. I fear that the generation that grew up on winamp, kazaa and half-life is lost to Linux. They have grown up on Windows! Grown up on the windows paradigms and concepts. They understand C:\ not / , 'Program Files' not 'usr', installshield not rpm. I doubt if these people will ever leave the Microsoft fold en masse. Some might, but the majority will stick to what they know.
Linux needs to be newbie friendly! It must have games! Killer app games, big hulking 3D extravaganzas, with all the driver support FOSS can offer. Plug and play needs to be standard. We need distros like gaming Knoppix now! If Linux doesn't get game, then it will lose another generation of potential penguins to the bitter chill of a OS devoid of gaming richness. Standardise Linux Gaming Now! Get P2P on the penguin!
People have to be able to have fun in Linux!!
May the Maths Be with you!
Bad enough .NET got ported.
If you port an inferior product people well feel compelled to write in it.
With a console you have one hardware spec which you can take advantage of to it's fullest without worry. As such the game is cheaper to develop and support while still looking incredible.
How much does it cost to develop a company's first console game, including the cost to establish a business relationship with the console maker, the cost per title, and the royalty per copy?
When every Linux user has an iMovies or music app or 3D Studio equivalent on their desktop just to play around with, then you'll have the base to create excellent art assets.
Cinelerra, Audacity/Ardour, and Blender. Next?
As consoles get better (and less expensive), I predict that PC gaming will die. Give it a decade.
Narfbot has a point. If PC gaming dies, then shareware games and Free games will die along with it. Console makers won't even talk to shareware developers. Or does your definition of "better" include "easily and lawfully moddable to run code not approved by the console maker"?
I guess you didn't RTFA where the ATI says it's a misconception that there are any issues with writing graphics drivers for Linux. In fact, it's easier than Windows.
But hey, you got modded up for mentioning "DMCA," "copyright law," and "patents" in a Slashdot discussion. No surprise there.
With the standard C library, OpenGL, SDL, and perhaps SDL_net, you have everything you need to develop quality games that'll run on any platform with minimal porting effort. The coding is simple too, not like the bloated, non-trivial crap that DirectX forces upon you.
"Sony are soon to release linux for the PS2."
That happened 4 years ago
"PS games == Linux games"
This is only PS games that YOU write== linux games.
I bought several titles from Loki. Many no longer work, mostly due to library issues. I would have to reinstall older versions of Linux to get them up and running. This could be avoided by doing static rather than dynamic compiles, or including libraries with the game in it's own subdirectory, and point the game there.
Compare this to Windows. I can still play almost all my games, from DOS forward, in XP SP2. Some aren't too playable due to computer speed issues (plays too fast!), but there are programs to work around that. I don't have to reinstall DOS.
With Windows, I think the only program I can't really use anymore with a modern system is qpv (it had the _best_ UI for me for picture viewing/sorting... it's sad that nothing I've seen has come close to it in usability).
[linuxhardware.org][...]
You could try GamesKnoppix This has ATI 3d support (and NVIDIA, and IntelExtreme); also gamepad support. For cross-platform stuff, check out gnuwin ; quite a reasonable Windows TuxRacer and Celestia.
When my friend and I were looking around at libraries to write the first game for our little game software startup company we found SDL plus OpenGL to be the wisest choice by far. For one thing, as the lone coder for these games I wanted something I could compile and test on Mac OS X. For another, we wanted something that would build and run on Linux in addition to Mac OS X and Windows 98/2K/XP. SDL was the only choice.
It is inevitable (perhaps even nigh) that a Linux-based console will be marketed some time within the next 10 years. It is also clear that multi-user systems like Linux and Mac OS X have serious long-term advantages over esoteric OS's like Longtooth based on Windows NT technology, however ubiquitous they may be.
Those who produce software with a short-term outlook probably find many advantages with DirectX, but to me it seems those advantages are more due to Microsoft's support policies than to the technology itself. SDL, OpenGL, and OpenAL are only going to keep going and keep getting stronger.
-- thinkyhead software and media
While its true that one needs more artists, writers and designers, one also needs more programmers, much more actually. Most open source gaming projects suffer from the lack of programmers no less then they do from the lack of artists. I have also seen more then enough games that failed due to the lack of programmers, not due to the lack of artists.
### It's time to try again. This time it will work.
The throuble is not really getting back to what Loki provided, ie. ports of older Windows games. There are already some other companies around who do the same, even so with a bit less releases than Loki did. The throuble is to make the jump from being a port-only bussiness to a game-producer one. What Linux needs are either ports that happen at the same time as the original release or even better are included with them or completly original games, both of these are extremly hard to accomplished, much harder then just porting a few games.
Loki died because it put itself into a financial hole that it never got out of. If all of their products had sold even half as well as Call to Power, the bad management decision everyone is so fond of citing wouldn't even have come into play. The bad decisions on the management side were nothing more than an exec drowning in debt trying to keep the company afloat any way possible because he believed it could still be profitable at some point.
I worked there. I can't and won't say that management made good decisions, but the whole company was buried under a mountain of debt because its products just didn't sell. Everything else came later.
I say this because it's important to recognize the problem before a reasonable solution can be found. The problem was (and is) that there's no evidence that people will pay for games that run only on Linux. The obvious solution is to make games that don't run only on Linux. That way the only problem becomes how to fund it.
Perhaps the worst business decision of them all was porting games to Linux in the first place. If you disregard the bad business practices and Scott's dishonesty and greed, the company would have still failed due to lack of sales. I say had a market actually existed, 50K for Quake 3 should have been attainable in a year at worst. And three years later, we still ain't closer.
pkarlos_76's Recent Submissions Title Datestamp TOM's HARDWARE GUIDE Reviews Games On Linux Friday December 31, @12:23AM Pending Geee...how does this happen, I submitted first..... :P Oh well I'll have to settlle with the satisfaction that it was posted. :)
I'm one of that minority
"The harsh truth is that you are not going to get the same adrenaline-charged, bust-them-up, shimmering lake and billowing smoke performance with Linux that you get on WindowsXP. Games like Halo and Half-Life 2 aren't there yet, so if you want the best of the best with NVIDIA's or ATi's latest for new blockbuster games, you need to stick to Microsoft."
I worked for a game development company for about 2 years. I've done 90% of the development on linux (most guys were coding in windows, but some of us used linux, everyone worked on the platform he felt more comfortable with).
The game (a 3D Commandos like strategy game) was running on both linux (OpenGL) and windows (OpenGL and DirectX). It run a bit better on linux actually. Was the linux version released? Nope. Why? I really don't know. The publisher didn't want to, 'cos they didn't think it had any market-share, or whatever...
So, at least in some cases it wouldn't even be extra cost to put out the linux version, yet it still doesn't happen... It would be nice if publishers at least allowed the developer company to provide the linux binary as a free, non-supported download. That way they'd at least get some feedback on whether it's worth to put it on the official CD or not.
We do have several obstacles to get over before linux mainstream gaming catches on, like supporting the various linux distros, consistent sound/input APIs, etc, but it would really start things going if publishers weren't so conservative about these things when it wouldn't cost them a dime to experiment...
cheers,
mitch
// "If human beings don't keep exercising their lips,
// their brains start working." -- Ford Prefect
I wasn't sure if you were arguing that WINE was or wasn't an emulator. I'll agree with you that it is. An emulator allows an unmodified program built for one environment to work in another. That is all. WINE is obviously not emulating an entire PC running Windows. It doesn't need to. It emulates the program execution environment (system calls, system services, et cetera) provided by a Windows operating system and translates it in realtime to another execution environment, UNIX (et alius). WINE therefore is an emulator. Quod erat demonstrandum.
My other first post is car post.
so you dont need wine
1) Lack of support for binary only drivers, there is no ABI for drivers in Linux so hardware manufactors have to hack their own way to get drivers more or less portable. Some hardware vendors fail doing so, others don't even try and some get it more or less done. Point is if Linux want support from hardware vendors it has to be nice to them, not pack the road to support Linux with incompatibities and hostility against binary only drivers
2) Lack of support for binary-only software, LSB is moving into the right direction, but there is still a lot of things going that make it hard to get binaries out for Linux that don't break after a distro upgrade. Many Loki titles for example are now broken, not unfixable, there are workarounds and patches, but its still quite a pain, at least a lot more then necessarry.
3) Lack of adoption by the 'comman-man', Linux is still more a freak toy or a hobby for many people on the desktop, this is of course in part caused by 1) and 2).
4) Lack of market for selling stuff for Linux. While the number of Linux installations might be quite high, the number of people actually buying software is rather small, people are just a bit to much used to get software for free.
The reasons for the lack high quality Open Source games are quite simple:
1) Lack of programmers, artists, game designers and basically all the people you need for games. As oposed to applications (Gimp, Office, etc.) you don't need just one, but basically at least a new one every month and since games are often at least as complicated as some applications its clear that there is simply a lack of man-power to get it done.
2) Lack of tools, on the 2d graphics side we only have Gimp, no alternatives. On the 3D side we have Blender and Wings3d, but there are neither much alternatives. When it comes to sound and music there are even less good applications around. And once it comes to things like level editors and such it gets extremly spare in the Open Source world.
3) Lack of people actually trying to write games, I mean there should be heaploads of story writers and good artists around, at least quite a bit more then programmer, yet very few of them seem to have the time or motivation to try a game project.
- 1998 Voodoo2: man was that ever cool, but that was pretty hard to install. You had to compile Mesa from source with the Voodoo2 patch.
- 1999 Voodoo Banshee: Another painfull install, this was right at the birth of DRI and XFree 4.0. I eventually got it working right nicely.
- 2000 GeForce2MX: This was a serious upgrade but a pretty easy install. Preformance was awesome.
- 2002 GeForce4MX: Just an incremental upgrade. All I did was swap the card in and it worked.
- 2004 GeForce FX5900: A serious upgrade which runs anything I throw at it. Switched to Gentoo with no major issues.
I've truly experienced the entire development of OpenGL acceleration in Linux. I went from cute software rendered Mesa in a window the size of a matchbook, to something that probably gives SGI workstations a run for the money. You should have seen my big shit-eating grin the first time I got glQuake running on that Voodoo2 in LinuxClickety Click
Taking a look at the SDL website news shows that version 1.2.8 of the main library was released on December 15th (under a month ago at the time of writing). There also appears to be active development on supporting libraries (such as SDL_mixer, SDL_ttf and SDL_image).
Sure Loki were a major supporter but development didn't stop after Loki disappeared...
To me it seems the largest problem facing both Mac OS X and Linux in terms of games is the return that a publisher is going to see after funding a port from Windows to Mac OS or Linux. For whatever reason, many developers decide to use Windows specific technologies (namely directX) to develop their games. If I was a publisher, I probably wouldn't want to fund a port when I know that such a small market might not cover the time and money invested into creating the port. Now, some of these costs could be made lower by using OpenGL to develop. Certainly id games are a good showcase of using OpenGL to stunning results and then being able to easily port to another system. I mean all of this seems kind of odd...publishers have always given the most support to the most popular platform in both the PC and console worlds. If I enjoy PS2 games, I don't think I would buy a Gamecube in hopes that all of my favorite games will be ported. If you enjoy games made for Windows, why not buy (or "acquire", I don't really care) a copy of Windows for your PC? Seems to make sense to me.
SIGFAULT
Strong words from an anonymous coward. Say that again under a real username and lets see.. its retards like you who ruin slashdot for the rest of us. Not to mention I dont think a fellow Linux user would talk like that. You sound like a windows user, or counter strike user...
If you knew which companies are evaluating Linux on the desktop, you would not be so smug about it.
Once that is in, the floodgates will be fully open.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
You name OSX and Apple all around your page.
....
Quelle surprise that OSX browsers are attracted to your little space on the web
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
... ignoring 10% of their potential customers, do so at great peril....
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
oh come on people!
I used to have a boss like you. The worst boss in my life.
I trust you'll forgive me if I'm not really concerned about your analogy. If you're going to make a blanket comparison that 1 similar attribute to a bad boss = all similar attributes, then I sure as hell wouldn't want you as an employee anyway. Guess we're both happy.
If people actually want to play games on Linux, then they should stop buying Windows-only games and write and tell the publishers why. If the publishers don't know there's a market, they won't value cross-platform games, and continue to use DirectX, something that will always be poorly supported on anything other than a Microsoft operating system.
Sorry, but that's very short-sighted. This has been a problem for software makers time and time again. Most of the time, they have always chosen the easy way out. If you look at compatibility issues between platforms, the lowest common denominator was almost always chosen even when the demand was strong and the proponents vocal. (Sound familiar?)
Just look back at the Commodore 64 and 128. The 128 was superior to the 64 in just about every way, from the 2x clock speed to the 2x memory. But it was 64-compatible. So, why bother spending separate development costs for both when you can write for one (the 64) and get compatibility with both? The Apple IIgs suffered from the same thing. (I'm sure that the Tandy and Atari lines suffered from the same problems as well at some point in time.) Yes, both platforms did have a few games that took advantage of the superior nature of the C128 ("Ultima V") and IIgs ("Zany Golf"), but for the most part the developers still took the lowest common denominator because it was the cheapest way out, regardless of the demand.
Now that WINE and Caldega are out, what makes you think that developers will have any incentive to make their games for Linux? After all, now Linux users can run Windows games! So at best you can probably expect the majroity of them to make their games WINE- or Caldega-compatible, but that's probably it, except for those developers that are hard-core Linux fans.
That's the problem with emulation. It broadens the lowest common denominator. I'm not saying to stop emulation so as to push development to native Linux. That would be incredibly ridiculous. But from the developer's perspective, if they have the choice between gaining a larger user base from adequate emulation at minimal cost or from native code at a much larger cost, you know which one will get chosen.
Yes, I agree that OpenGL would likely solve a lot of these problems, but I think that's going to be a very difficult sell.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
Ever tried to use Fire GL2 on any distro with any version of X after 4.0.2?
:-(
There's no support for any of the old GL2..4 cards and most likely will never be.
And no, XFree86 4.0.2 is NOT an option.
Only binary drivers, no specs, no chicken-squat. And no reason to expect ATI to change, ever. Sad
Same goes for most of their laptop chipsets, which usually have only 2D drivers which are only marginally better than vesa bios crap.
As a side effect of this setup, I'm much more productive in Linux, if only because playing games requires a reboot.
Open Source Sushi
Well, the "cost savings" I was referring to was more the benefit of keeping OLD, EXISTING systems functional. Not many people can stand using Windows on an early Pentium 1 or 486DX anymore. If you're in a small business/office environment, it's even worse, because you're typically adding the overhead of file and print sharing on top of everything else.
I know one guy, for example, who is pretty much a Linux guru, but works at his parents' company, which is on a shoestring budget and barely making it. He introduced them to Linux, because until they discovered what he could do with it plus all their outdated hardware, they were pretty much scrapping the computers completely and going back to pencil and paper. (Heck, up until a couple years ago, they were still backing things up on those Colorado Jumbo 250 tapes!)
Why not distribute a game as a full bootable (linux) distribution. Think of it like booting up Knoppix, the hardware being auto-detected, then up comes Doom III. Sure there are some disadvantages to the end power user, but think of the advantages to the game developers. For starters, game speed would be great since the entire distro could be tuned for the game. Better stability and easier qa cycles since the entire enviroment would be based on their standardization and they wouldn't have to worry about what ever else might happen to be running in the background on any given machine (think cpu sucking spyware). It wouldn't be so different from booting up a PS2 or Xbox right into a game...