Slashdot Mirror


Cedega 5.1 Released

Gamasutra reports that Cedega 1.5 has been released for Linux gamers looking for a Civ IV fix. From the release: "TransGaming Technologies has released Cedega 5.1, which features support for some of the newest PC titles such as Sid Meier's Civilization IV, FIFA 06 and Need for Speed: Most Wanted. Cedega allows games originally created for the Windows platform to run on Linux, straight out of the box. Other titles supported on Cedega 5.1 include Battlefield 2, Dungeon Siege II, City of Villains, Madden NFL 2006, World of WarCraft, Half-Life 2, Guild Wars, and many others. Cedega 5.1 builds on this growing list of game titles with new features that improve overall game play."

122 comments

  1. In related news by dtfinch · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wine 0.9.8 was released today.

    1. Re:In related news by chaves · · Score: 1

      You mean Wine 9.0.8, right?

    2. Re:In related news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You might be dyslexic.

    3. Re:In related news by flatface · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He's commenting on the summary saying "Gamasutra reports that Cedega 1.5 has been released".

    4. Re:In related news by Xymor · · Score: 0

      Wine 9.0.8 should be able to emulate even the Blue screen of death.

    5. Re:In related news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The typo will be corrected soon enough, leaving only these funny comments. Bwuahahahahahaha!

  2. WINE by HeavensBlade23 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Cedega is starting to look a bit redundant due to some of the recent developments in WINE.

  3. How useful? / Machine Requirements by jmusits · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've been off Microsoft(TM) for about 8 years. I fooled around w/ Cedega a while back and although it could install games I wanted to play (X-Wing Alliance, Command & Conquer). It would always segfault when I tried to run them. Now my hardware is nothing spectacular, but these games are older and shouldn't require the latest and greatest. I actually had better luck w/ dosemu to play another version of X-Wing vs. TieFighter that was DOS based instead of Win95 based.

    I was wondering how much more taxing the games are on hardware than when running natively on a Win based machine. Also does Cedega have requirements itself?

    Jason

    -- 42

    --
    -- 42 --
    1. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I tend to agree. I was a subscriber for over a year. Games that were listed as "should work" never worked for me. I used RedHat, Debian, Gentoo, no good. I tried various Nvidia cards across Intel and AMD processors.

      We even had geek LAN parties where we tried to get things to work. We eventually got BF1942 to work a little. And Rainbow6 worked quiet well.

      But, looking back, I think that the vast majority of people claiming success with WineX were company shills. Either that, or people didn't want to admit that their $5 a month was a complete waste.

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
    2. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Informative

      They focus on making the most popular games work and screw the rest. I have no trouble admitting that my 3 month subscription of $5/month was a waste of money. I signed up so I could participate in the voting, only to discover how truely shallow people are. So I gave $15 to a quasi-open-source company, better than giving it to Microsoft I guess.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    3. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 1

      >>They focus on making the most popular games work and screw the rest.

      No, they work on making you think that the most popular games will work. When you actually try to install, patch, and play these games, you find out otherwise.

      >>better than giving it to Microsoft I guess.

      If you have a problem with MS, then why buy a game based on that system? A game sale for a MS game is the same as an OS sale for MS. The devs license DirectX, programming tools, and logos. They feed the coffers of the monster.

      Me, I just wanna play a fucking game without rebooting. Fuck all that RMS GNU/Bullshit.

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
    4. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What does rebooting have to do with GNU? You seem to be the one who needs to play games.

    5. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by ahpx · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm not sure about all of you guys. But it plays what I want with no problems.
      I just bought the Command and Conquer: The First Decade pack. Wine it errors on the installer, Cedega, it installs and runs perfectly. No gameplay problems, no lag, any of that crap.
      Guild Wars, works.
      World of Warcraft, works.
      Steam and All the apps, they work too.
      Civ 4, yep.

      What more can you want?
      Alot of games work with Cedega.. I don't see why all of you have these problems.
      My box isn't top of the line, in fact it's almost 3 years old, and I run everything without a problem.

    6. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by Keen+Anthony · · Score: 1
      I was wondering how much more taxing the games are on hardware than when running natively on a Win based machine. Also does Cedega have requirements itself?


      Cedega is still basically WINE with maybe some optimizations for gaming, right? If so, games shouldn't be anymore taxing on Linux than on Windows since you're working with a translation layer to the Windows API rather than an emulation of Windows on Linux. In theory though, performance could take a hit if compromises were made in order to get DirectX 9 games working.

      Disclaimer: I stopped trying to use WINE and Cedega years ago, so I'm admittedly ignorant of recent changes.
    7. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by QuantaStarFire · · Score: 0

      Yes, all of those work. Then again, most of those would have been voted in.

      But consider the people who DON'T play the latest and greatest titles. Suppose that I play FFXI instead of WoW. FFXI has never worked on Cedega, and it probably never will because of the voting system. This makes Cedega into a product that caters to the popular vote instead of a product that caters to the person that wants something to make their games actually run under a Linux environment, and that's why some people do not like it. The games list doesn't really get updated all that often, and you can't ask on the forums for information on whether Game X works or not because their forum is members-only.

      So yeah, it's great if you play WoW, but God help you if you want to play something that isn't as popular.

    8. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by pilot1 · · Score: 1

      Most of the less popular games require a little bit of tweaking before they work properly. I've never had any of the games that they list as working not work, some just require time spent tweaking Cedega and in-game settings.

    9. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by paeanblack · · Score: 1

      Most of the less popular games require a little bit of tweaking before they work properly.

      Yeah...'tweaking' called "Aw, fuck this", [CTRL]-[ALT]-[DEL], [DOWN], [ENTER]

      I never figured out what I ever got for my $5/month. If it actually runs in Cedega, generally it also runs in wine. Point2Play is a pain in my ass, and probably everyone else's too. I'd rather they work on getting the games to actually run out-of-the-box than to write a braindead app launcher.

    10. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by 0racle · · Score: 3, Interesting

      God help you if you want to play something that isn't as popular

      You could always run it on the system it was designed for.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    11. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by QuantaStarFire · · Score: 1

      True, but doesn't that defeat the purpose of trying to get rid of Windows?

    12. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by 0racle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why get rid of something you obviously still need.

      Other then treating an OS as a religion of course.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    13. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by phorm · · Score: 1

      But, looking back, I think that the vast majority of people claiming success with WineX were company shills. Either that, or people didn't want to admit that their $5 a month was a complete waste.

      What exactly gives you that impression? If you're worrie, check my comments and see that I'm a longtime poster, no Transgaming employee/shill. While a lot of my games didn't work wonderfully back in the WineX days, I generally had luck with the popular ones (Warcraft III was big at the time). Nowadays, I tend to use it more exclusively as my windows hardware drivers like to lock up. On my laptop, BF2 ran better in Cedega, though probably due to issues with the NVidia drivers not updating right in windows.

      My biggest complaint is that there are a lot of what appear to be minor issue that *could* be fixed, but since the bigger money is in newer games, there's little support for fixing the little things that make older games work properly.

    14. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by QuantaStarFire · · Score: 1

      It's a colossal PITA to switch between OSes everytime I have the urge to play a game. Why not try to eliminate that problem so that I can work exclusively in an operating system I like as opposed to an operating system I've grown to dislike after years of general use? It makes more sense to me.

    15. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by corvair2k1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So grab some source (don't know if Cedega's is available, but you can get Wine) and make it work. Voting is not a bad thing... You want to cater to a general audience before the niche. It's not unreasonable to expect a low marketshare game to not get priority treatment. If your low-popularity game was going to get made, so would every game as popular or more popular... That's not reasonable.

    16. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by 0racle · · Score: 1

      Whats a bigger pain in the ass?

      A) 1 minute reboot into another OS
      or
      B) Spend who knows how much time setting up an application to emulate the other OS so you can play a game for it, provided you play what everyone else plays, or spending even more time hacking the code to play the game if its not what others decided you should be playing.

      shutdown -r now is hardly a pain in the ass compared to the alternative. A computer and its OS is a tool, use the right tool for the right job. For games, Linux is not the right tool.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    17. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by xtracto · · Score: 1

      I also have a question about playing games on Linux. Is it possible to use gamepads at all? I have a playstation type with 2 analog sticks, L1, L2, R1 and R2 buttons, 4 standards buttons the D-pad and a start and select button. I can use it in MSWindows XP without any driver (just plug it and it is recognized).

      I like to play with gamepads as I got used to it from console gaming. I tried to connect this joystick 3 years ago to a Mandrake box but I could not use it, I believe the system "saw" it but there was no way (that I knew) to configure any game to use it.

      My question is if it is possible (and on which distro) to use this or any other gamepad/joystick with Cedega or Linux in general. Also, I have not seen in any distribution something similar to the MS "Gaming Options" window which shows you and lets you configure and test all your gamepads *the easy way*.

      Does anybody has any experience on this?

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    18. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by rben · · Score: 1

      What I'd like to know is, does it run Dungeons & Dragons Online? I've been playing in the beta for DDO for months and I really enjoy the game.

      The only reason I keep Windows is for games. I'd love it if I could finally get away from Windows once and for all.

      --

      -All that is gold does not glitter - Tolkien
      www.ra

    19. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by The+Warlock · · Score: 1

      Then buy a fucking GameCube or something. It worked for me.

      --
      I've upped my standards, so up yours.
    20. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by MyOtherUIDis3digits · · Score: 1

      Blasphemer! Burn in hell!

      --
      Ignore anything I said above, I actually agree with everything you believe - mod accordingly.
    21. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've use a Nyko AirFlo to play BF1942, GTA:3, GTA:VC and the NFS:U series in Cedega. It works fine on RHL 7.2 and FC 4.

      Some controllers work without changes to the default configuration. Those with a ton of axes may need some tweaking to get it working as you'd like. Cedega has a way to map an axis but lacks a way to quickly/easily test your change to see if it is doing what you want. The syntax is fairly cryptic as well.

    22. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      As unique as TransGaming's development model is, I think the progress that has been made in the last year to get Wine working as well as Cedega just goes to show the strengths and weaknesses of open source. TransGaming has a limited number of resources dominated by their ability to raise capital. They have to focus their work or they will lose that capital. I don't know if voting is the best way to do that but it seems like an intelligent solution. Compare this with open source development. There is a (theoretically) unlimited number of resources and those resources are spread very thin over a wide number of games, and typically not just the games that the majority want working. That's a strength I think. The weakness is the pace at which things get done and the motivators to make these things happen.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    23. Re:How useful? / Machine Requirements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > A computer and its OS is a tool, use the right tool for the right job.
      > For games, Linux is not the right tool.

      And that's a bug. There's no law that says Linux has to be much better at networking than Windows but mutch worse for playing games.
      When you live in an imperfect world you can either be fatalistic, say that this is how things are and how they always will be. Or you can try to make the world a better place like the TransGaming, CodeWeavers and Wine guys are doing.

  4. Bit of a step backwards by BertieBaggio · · Score: 2, Funny

    From the blurb:

    Gamasutra reports that Cedega 1.5 has been released for Linux gamers looking for a Civ IV fix

    A bit of editorial nostalgia, perhaps?
    --
    If all you have is a grenade, pretty soon every problem looks like a foxhole -- MightyYar
  5. Judging by the link in this article... by DarkJC · · Score: 2, Funny

    You must mean Wine 8.9.0

  6. WoW, Amd 64, Via Chipset, ATI Radeon 9200 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Last time I tried Cedega it didn't work. Textures were missing.

    This was playing WoW on an AMD64 in 32bit mode, on a motherboard with a Via chipset and an AGP ATI Radeon 9200 (Gigabyte)

    I upgraded my bios and tried so many things and eventually gave up. I have a windows machine now. So have they fixed this?

    1. Re:WoW, Amd 64, Via Chipset, ATI Radeon 9200 by pyite69 · · Score: 1

      I have been happy with WoW on Cedega for awhile now, 8 months perhaps. Sadly, it has required quite a bit of playing around with settings to get things working nicely.

      Recently I installed Ubuntu and it was extremely easy to get NVidia, Cedega, and Warcraft to work... I only needed the memory workaround (0x010000000)

    2. Re:WoW, Amd 64, Via Chipset, ATI Radeon 9200 by the_greywolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      many people, including myself (GeForce FX 5900, non-ultra) have been playing WoW nearly bug-free for a long time. in fact, i heard most of the texture problems have been resolved, but most of those that remain are due to the ATi drivers. there are numerous known (and acknowledged) issues with ATi cards and drivers in particular, and the forums are rife with people complaining about their Ati stuff not working as expected.

      that said, support improves every month with every new release, and with your subscription, you can vote for what matters to you. (and, since ATi issues come up every voting cycle, VOTE, DAMNIT.) (note, i typically vote -1 on most ATi issues, but i'll stop that if you agree to start voting.)

      also, read the forums. it's a bitch, i know, but really, there is a lot of helpful information there if you just take the time to find it. the really big things get stickied (0x10000000 mem loc. fix for mouse in WoW, for example) and everything else will come up from time to time. and don't rule out your distro's forums, either. the official Gentoo gamer forum has threads for all sorts of problems that come up in Cedega, with tips on getting other games to work in vanilla Wine.

      they claim it's out-of-the-box compatibility, but as with anything on linux, you have to care enough to fiddle with it a little.

      --
      grey wolf
      LET FORTRAN DIE!
    3. Re:WoW, Amd 64, Via Chipset, ATI Radeon 9200 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a bad combo even in windows. I had AMD Duron, VIA chipset, and AGP Radeon 9600. The video card had some quirks because it was with a VIA chipset (artifacts, mouse problems, etc.) Windows and Linux are equally bad in this particular situation. I went with Linux.

  7. Cedega and Punkbuster by GrmpyOldPgmr · · Score: 2, Informative

    I was just evaluating Cedega 5.x the last 2 or 3 days with Battlefield 1942 and it worked pretty good but there's still plenty of issues with Punkbuster unfortunately. After a day or two of messing with manually updating Punkbuster (I think) I may have actually successfully updated it and was able to get on a few Punkbuster servers without getting the annoying O/S privileges messages. A good tip is to change your profile to WinME or Win98 if you have it as WinXP or Win2K. I'm still debating if I want to actually subscribe or not though. I would almost be able to run Slackware full time now that I have Windows 2000 running satisfactorily in QEMU. A Cisco VPN client and about 5 or 6 games are all that's keeping me dual-booting these days.

    1. Re:Cedega and Punkbuster by floop · · Score: 1

      Latest(?) version of Cisco VPN client for Linux. Runs great on Ubuntu 5.10 and Fedora Core 4, lateset kernels.

    2. Re:Cedega and Punkbuster by norkakn · · Score: 1

      Cisco releases a linux version of their vpn client. That being said, I like vpnc better.

    3. Re:Cedega and Punkbuster by GrmpyOldPgmr · · Score: 1

      It's a company specfic VPN client based on Cisco's unfortunately so no Linux support. I just boot Win2k in QEMU and run it and all my work apps in there. When I need to do some work in Linux, I hit Ctrl and Alt to ungrab the mouse and I'm back in KDE. The games are actually the only thing that don't run in Win2k in QEMU and the only reason I still dual boot.

    4. Re:Cedega and Punkbuster by Rhys · · Score: 2, Insightful

      * net-misc/vpnc
                  Latest version available: 0.3.3-r1
                  Latest version installed: [ Not Installed ]
                  Size of files: 58 kB
                  Homepage: http://www.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/~massar/vpnc/
                  Description: Free client for Cisco VPN routing software
                  License: GPL-2 BSD

      Cisco makes a client themselves too but it sucks. I have used vpnc successfully in the past on my laptop with the ipw2100 drivers to get on the wireless network here at UIUC.

      I ran cedega for a while, but even doing hardware swaps (my windows and linux machines are identical except for the video card) CoH ran about 10-20% slower on average in framerate.

      This would probably have been okay but as I sad that was average. Standard deviation was way up there, which was the problem. Smooth smooth smooth smooth frame-per-second-crawl-for-3-seconds smooth smooth smooth. Didn't look like it was a lack of memory issue or what-not.

      --
      Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
  8. I have had good luck. by cosmotron · · Score: 3, Informative

    I have Cedega 4.1 and got Steam working in it (before they changed the skin) and Anarchy Online. I didn't even need to do anything; just fired up cedega and ran the executable.

    --
    Ryan - http://www.thecosmotron.com/
    1. Re:I have had good luck. by KrisW · · Score: 1

      This is slightly offtopic, but did you need to do anything special to get Anarchy Online running at more than a snail's pace? Indoors areas were fine, but I ended up with a framerate under 1FPS in city/outdoor areas. I should note that I'm using the CVS version of Cedega.

      --


      "Think you can take me? Go ahead on. It's your move." --Joe Don Baker in Final Justice
  9. wake me up... by Truekaiser · · Score: 2, Insightful

    when they stop charging you like a mmorpg.

    1. Re:wake me up... by damiam · · Score: 3, Informative

      Unless I'm much mistaken, they don't charge you like an MMORPG. Your subscription buys you voting rights and access to updates. If you cancel, you still have the right to use the software that you've already downloaded.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    2. Re:wake me up... by the_greywolf · · Score: 1

      indeed. and further, Cedega's cost is roughly $60/yr., which is about the same cost as a new off-the-shelf game or two. well worth the price over Windows itself, IMHO.

      just need to stop looking at it like a monthly fee... more like a new license every year... for the price of a new game. :)

      --
      grey wolf
      LET FORTRAN DIE!
    3. Re:wake me up... by dave1g · · Score: 1

      Windows costs what, 100 bucks? And each version stays around for ~5 years.

      Thats $20 a year to your $60 with Cedega....

      You pay less by using a legit dual boot windows.

    4. Re:wake me up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paying $60 a year, or $180 for three years is way more efficient than just buying Windows. And Cedega works so flawlessly and with performance at least ten times better! Sorry, it's opposite day isn't it?

    5. Re:wake me up... by damiam · · Score: 1

      You can pay $5 and keep your copy of Cedega for eternity if you want. No one's forcing you to subscribe.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    6. Re:wake me up... by Trelane · · Score: 1
      Windows XP Home Upgrade is USD100. Full XP Home is 200. IIRC, Pro Upgrade is 200, and full is 300. Prices may vary within a few tens of dollars depending on sales, but those are retail costs.

      Now, I fully realize that you can probably find XP OEM for much less, but it comes with bigger restrictions (particularly that it's locked to whatever machine you install it on (even more, I think it's technically locked to whatever hardware you bought with it)). IIRC, Cedega can be transferred between PCs at will.

      That said, yes, it'd likely be cheaper (and better-functioning) in the long run to just buy Windows. But it's very annoying (to me, at least) to dual-boot, and I'd rather not give Microsoft any more money/support to enable them to trash Linux and other competitors. (It's not "religious"; it's being an active consumer--the cornerstone of the capitalist system.)

      For me, the solution is to not buy Windows-Only games. Which is the fully cheapest solution of all--no Windows, few USD50 games, and I don't have to reboot and stop everything I'm doing (which is generally a lot). I do have Cedega, primarily for older games and discount-shelf games. If a USD10 game doesn't run, no sweat. The main games I loved to play back under Windows--Diablo 2, StarCraft, and a few others--play just fine (though it'd be so very nice if Transgaming would make the other games work too!). I guess I just don't have the gamer mentality. Games don't rule me--they're an occasional fun diversion.

      --

      --
      Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
    7. Re:wake me up... by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      Good point.

      I still use WineX 3.x to play games like GTA:VC, Baldur's Gate 2, and Deus Ex. It's been years since I bought a new game, so who knows how well that would work. But you can keep running old versions indefinately.

  10. Link Mislabeled by Sean0michael · · Score: 3, Informative

    The link is labeled "Cedega 1.5" while the title and summary clearly state it as "Cedega 5.1". Can we fix this please? Thanks.

    --
    Funtime Candy Wow! - my plan for eventually conquering Japan.
  11. The ass-backwards solution by billcopc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I hate to yank everyone back to reality here, but if you can't get your favorite Windoze games to run with Cedega, and you REALLY want to play those games, why not dedicate a true gaming PC running XP and not munge your clean Linux system with all this patchy crap ? Yes it costs money, but Cedega costs money, and games cost money. You have to pay to play. Either that or invest in an Xbox/Playstation.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:The ass-backwards solution by paeanblack · · Score: 4, Informative

      I hate to yank everyone back to reality here, but if you can't get your favorite Windoze games to run with Cedega, and you REALLY want to play those games, why not dedicate a true gaming PC running XP and not munge your clean Linux system with all this patchy crap ?

      1) Games that have massive memory requirements often run better in wine than on XP. In Simcity 4, I've got some cities that will no longer load in XP, but can chug along in wine.

      2) Laptop drives aren't big enough that I'm willing to have a windows partition, but I still want my gaming fix when I'm on the road.

      In general, though, you are right. A dedicated gaming box often gives the best results.

    2. Re:The ass-backwards solution by Octorian · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's exactly what I used to do, back when my "UNIX Desktop" was a Sun machine. But as I progressively got fed up with Sun's lack of decent 2D graphics hardware, I found the machine was probably better used as a server. (Already had a Sun server running a bunch of Sun Ray thin clients, but that desktop was a faster machine.)

      For the longest time, I did want to maintain the dual-machine setup. As such, I really wanted to build some sort of Opteron super-workstation for *only* UNIX-like OSes (Linux or FreeBSD). But it always looked like it would cost me at least $2-3k, and I never had the money laying around.

      As such, my "Windows gaming machine" has since become my "Linux desktop". While I could reboot, I've grown accustomed to a persistent desktop session. I also want to go straight back to *nix after playing a game. So, I try and use Cedega when it works for me, or just "deal with it" when it doesn't. (rebooting is a very rare occurance, since I don't have that much gaming time these days, and rebooting is only good if I want to spend a lot of time gaming)

    3. Re:The ass-backwards solution by Buck2 · · Score: 1

      Install Cedega
      Install Starcraft
      Play

      No patches, no extra computers.

      --

      As my father lik@(munch munch)... ....
    4. Re:The ass-backwards solution by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 3, Informative
      "I hate to yank everyone back to reality here, but if you can't get your favorite Windoze games to run with Cedega, and you REALLY want to play those games, why not dedicate a true gaming PC running XP and not munge your clean Linux system with all this patchy crap ? Yes it costs money, but Cedega costs money, and games cost money. You have to pay to play. Either that or invest in an Xbox/Playstation."

      So with Cedega, for $60 per year, I can use my existing Linux PC which is well decked out with lots of RAM, a fast CPU, and a nice video card. As an added bonus I'm supporting WINE development.

      I could convert my box into a dual boot box, but then I'll have to pay for Windows ($268, respent every few years as new Windows releases come out), I have to put up with the nuisance of rebooting, and any services my PC provides are unavailable while in Windows.

      I could, as you suggest, purchase a dedicated gaming PC. For something roughly equivalent to my Linux PC, I'd be looking at about $700 (respent every few years either in upgrades or replacements), assuming I'll reused the monitor from my Linux PC. And I'll need to find space for the extra machine.

      I could buy an XBox or Playstation (I'd hardly call a piece of commodity electronics an "investment"), but I've been having problems getting World of Warcraft, Civ 4, City of Heroes, and Warcraft III running on either platform.

      For some people Cedega is a very reasonable option. Encouraging people to spend money unnecessarily is stupid. Many people can be perfectly happy with Cedega and end up saving money. Personally it isn't for me (I play too many games, so I suffer with the dual boot option), but I'm not sneering at people who make that choice. You're not yanking people back to reality, you're ignoring reality.

    5. Re:The ass-backwards solution by billcopc · · Score: 1

      I'm obviously not a heavy linux desktop advocate.. servers yes, desktops no. Do you really need a bleeding-edge gaming machine to run Linux ? Yes, it would certainly be nice if the gaming industry could release more native Linux builds of their games, but that doesn't seem to be happening for various reasons, one that comes to mind is that Linux is not "stable", and by stable I don't mean crashing, I mean the codebase. When you design a game for Windows XP, you know everyone's got the same base, and you can install any needed libraries in a predictable manner. You also get commercial support from MS and the graphics card manufacturers to make it work smoothly. With linux, you could be running any of two dozen kernels with a number of custom mods and tweaks. 3D-accelerated graphics drivers are poorly supported (if at all). Really the only orgasmic thing about Linux from a game developer's perspective is networking.

      The other great barrier to entry is DirectX. Oh sure, I hear you all shouting "use OpenGL instead", okay so that covers graphics. What about audio, controls, networking, etc ? DirectX is a complete multimedia framework, while OpenGL is just a graphics language. SDL ain't bad but it isn't the #1 and never will be.

      It always boils down to the same sad problem: Money. The Linux gaming community isn't yet large enough to warrant a non-negligible investment on behalf of the graphics giants NVidia and ATI. We either have to bite the bullet and wait until the community reaches critical mass, or we're going to have to bend over and play nice with the other team.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    6. Re:The ass-backwards solution by fujiman · · Score: 1
      You've almost got it right.


      Put your favorite distro on the *cheap* computer ( I have Debian running on a Pentium I, thank you )

      Put Windows on the kick ass computer for games.


      You put the resources where they're needed. The great thing about Linux is that it doesn't need a lot of resources.

    7. Re:The ass-backwards solution by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 1
      "Do you really need a bleeding-edge gaming machine to run Linux ?"

      I don't understand what your point is. I don't have a bleeding-edge gaming machine. I have a very powerful desktop workstation that I run Linux on. It just happens that the key difference between "powerful workstion" and "powerful gaming machine" is a good video card. Even a cheap, mainstream video card would turn it into a solid, if unexceptional gaming machine. I've already made up my mind to run Linux on that machine; that I could use Cedega to run games on it as well is a bonus. I can't be the only person in this situation, otherwise Transgaming would have gone out of business years ago.

      As for the rest of your post about why people don't develop for Linux, agreed, but it seems massively off topic. The entire point of Cedega is to not wait for game developers to support Linux. Many people criticize Transgaming suggesting that it's hurting the chances of developers natively supporting Linux.

    8. Re:The ass-backwards solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You aren't "supporting WINE development." Transgaming doesn't contribute its work back to Wine. Why do you think Wine switched its license to the LGPL?

      You're just paying $60/year to run a tiny handful of games poorly.

  12. Wouldn't it have been easier? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wouldn't it have been easier to just simply port Civ IV to linux?

    1. Re:Wouldn't it have been easier? by QuantaStarFire · · Score: 5, Funny
      Wouldn't it have been easier to just simply port Civ IV to linux?

      Are you kidding? That would require forethought, and research, and abandonment of the precious DirectX API! Fire would rain from the heavens! Locusts would eat all our crops! Everyone would be covered in boils! It would be the apocalypse!

  13. My experience with Cedega by jb.hl.com · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I tried Cedega once. TransGaming claim to support Half-Life 2 through it, so I gave it a go.

    Steam installed fine, so did HL2. After everything was ready to go, I ran the game.

    Hard lock up.

    Rebooted the PC, started again. This time everything worked fine, except I got maybe 1fps. This on a not spectacularly fast PC/graphics card, but one more than capable of properly running HL2 under Windows. Even turning down details, resolution etc until everything was at the level of a NES game didn't help. Frankly pathetic.

    This is why I use Windows...simple tasks, like running a game, just work properly and with a minimum fuss. I can hear everybody going "Well get Valve to release a Linux version then." Well, when they do, and I doubt they will, maybe we won't need stupid hacks like Cedega, which barely work.

    I really do wonder what the deal is with people saying they got speed increases from Cedega. My experience is...well, no way.

    --
    By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    1. Re:My experience with Cedega by damiam · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Cedega probably wasn't your problem. I'd bet that you probably didn't have hardware 3D acceleration set up for your video card. The stock installs of most distros use the 2D-only open-source drivers distributed with X, which are useless for gaming. You wouldn't expect games to work under Windows without installing the proper drivers, and the same is true for Linux. With decent drivers (i.e. binaries from nVidia, or the open-source drivers for older Radeons), most games should run at similar framerates under Windows and Linux/Cedega.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    2. Re:My experience with Cedega by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      I was running the NVIDIA binary drivers on Debian under a recent kernel. Under WindowMaker, so the DE couldn't have been the problem.

      Nope, it's probably cedega.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    3. Re:My experience with Cedega by Sparr0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      [i]Hard lock up.[/i]

      Then your system is broken at a level far deeper than Cedega. No misbehaving software can completely lock up the average linux system other than unintentional fork bombs, which I am relatively sure you won't encounter with Cedega.

    4. Re:My experience with Cedega by the_greywolf · · Score: 2, Informative

      the binary nVidia driver isn't bug-free, either. i've had some major terminal lockups (requiring that i either SSH in and reboot or simply reset or it's just effectively headless) due to that driver. though i do with they'd open-source it so we could get these terminal driver problems fixed. :\

      --
      grey wolf
      LET FORTRAN DIE!
    5. Re:My experience with Cedega by Sparr0 · · Score: 1

      If you can SSH in, its not a hard lockup. I have any number of random devices in this room that are always connected to my main machine by ssh, and are used in just such occasions.

      If it's a problem with the nVidia driver then it has nothing to do with Cedega and Linux-native games are going to lock up too.

    6. Re:My experience with Cedega by gnarlin · · Score: 1

      Well, you can always find out by running glxinfo|grep direct
      is it says no then you have found the culprit. It might also be useful to run glxgears and note the framrate.
      It's also good to run a native fps, say nexuiz,q1-4,ut2004 or something. For comparison.

      --
      A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
    7. Re:My experience with Cedega by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      and by this post, i can clearly see that you do not have ATI drivers, since they freeze even when running the savers from xscreensaver-gl .. bringin the box to a grinding halt.. Good for you sir!

    8. Re:My experience with Cedega by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HL2, installed and played till the end with the cedega release at that time, problems encountered - 0.
      Perhaps you have an ATI card, which is known to cause problems. or perhaps 3D accell was not installed properly, which would explain 1fps.

      check the cedega unofficial wiki entry for HL2 at - http://cedegawiki.sweetleafstudios.com/wiki/Half_L ife_2

      in my personal expirience, all supported games have always worked without any! problems. in fact i have small lan parties with friends (windows users) and it all works without problems (call of duty, battle field, etc).

    9. Re:My experience with Cedega by X_Bones · · Score: 1

      So because you gave it one try and couldn't get it to work for whatever reason, that has to mean that everyone else who claims it works fine must be lying? What a ridiculous argument.
      Did you read the release notes for your version of Cedega? Did you search through the nearly 2500 posts dedicated to Source games on the Cedega discussion forums? Did you look anywhere else on the web for help?

      Or did you just give up and start badmouthing a program because you couldn't get it to do something that many other people can?

      FWIW, I played HL2 (and SimCity 4 and GTA3:VC) with few to no problems with Cedega 4.3 . It's not impossible if you're willing to actually configure your installation properly.

    10. Re:My experience with Cedega by damiam · · Score: 1

      Did you try running a Linux-native game to make sure 3D acceleration was working? I have a hard time believing that anything other than driver problems would cause the kind of slowdown you're talking about.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    11. Re:My experience with Cedega by Dave2+Wickham · · Score: 1

      Are you running the latest drivers? I had the same issue with some 7xxx drivers, but the latest ones appear to have solved it.

    12. Re:My experience with Cedega by lazyl · · Score: 1

      These types of posts infuriate me.

      So because you gave it one try and couldn't get it to work for whatever reason, that has to mean that everyone else who claims it works fine must be lying?

      It starts off by fabricating an opinion. Forget what he actually said; let's pretend he said something different because that's what you prefer to argue against.

      Did you read the release notes for your version of Cedega? Did you search through the nearly 2500 posts dedicated to Source games on the Cedega discussion forums? Did you look anywhere else on the web for help?

      Then you go on to completely miss the point. Windows games work out the box 95% of the time. And if something doesn't work, you can almost always fix it with a quick driver update or a quick glance at the forums; your problem is almost guranteed to seen by others and the topic of very easy to find a discussion.

      With Cedega finding the answer to a problem might be 10 minutes or might be never. Many problems are very hard to debug; crashes, hangs, or just painful framerates. They're also very hard to search the forums for; what do you look for? "It hangs"? Good luck with that. Did you search through the nearly 2500 posts. HAHAHA.. you made my point for me.

      Or did you just give up and start badmouthing a program because you couldn't get it to do something that many other people can?

      Don't be an asshole. He didn't 'badmouth' it. He simply described how it didn't work for him. You have absolutly no idea what percentage of people who try Cedega actually get it to work so don't presume you do.

      FWIW, I played HL2 (and SimCity 4 and GTA3:VC) with few to no problems with Cedega 4.3 . It's not impossible if you're willing to actually configure your installation properly.

      Just because you got it to work doesn't mean it will work for everybody. I run ubuntu on my computer and I play native games fine (NWN, quake4, unreal tournament, etc). I couldn't get Cedega to play the games I wanted for all my efforts (which included seaching forums and such). WoW crashed on startup everytime with some generic error and Morrowind ran impossibly slow. You seem to think everyone who can't get it to work must be either stupid or lazy. You need to pull your head out of your ass. Cedega is flakey. Sometimes it just wont work.

      Hopefully it's improving. Maybe eventually it will be worth paying for; but as far as I'm concerned it's not there yet. I really hate paying for something only to discover after I get it that it doesn't work. I paid 15 bucks and got nothing for it. That's the reason I will probably never try Cedega again; I'll just stick to wine.

      --
      Aw crap, ninjas!
    13. Re:My experience with Cedega by molarmass192 · · Score: 1

      Something ain't right about your post. What distro release / cedega release / video card / accelerated driver / X-win system did you use? Considering you state "This is why I use Windows", I find it hard to believe that you'd have the Linux experience to troubleshoot this problem alone. I could easily say I use Linux because Windows doesn't let me do simple tasks like restart the GUI without rebooting, truth is, although it's just 3 keys under Linux, it's still an involved task at the OS level. Anyhow, to get to my point, running a game, while a simple end user task, is one of the most complex tasks (especially detailed games like HL2) that are handled on PCs. Toss in an blind rewrite of a complex layer like DirectX on top of that and you're bound to get shitty end user expierences and over blown expectations. Yeah, I think they have some interesting code there but I wouldn't shed a single tear if they were to disappear tomorrow and (gasp) I think the alternative OS world might actaully be better without them from an expectations angle, your post being a case in point.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    14. Re:My experience with Cedega by the_greywolf · · Score: 1

      i did say it's a terminal lockup. video freezes, and it's unresponsive to keyboard input. and, as i said, i SSH in to reset.

      however, it only happens rarely, if at all on any of the drivers from the 70- and 80-series. that said, when i take care to not let it happen, it doesn't. switching between TTYs and X sessions rapidly will lock it up fast and hard. it might just be the fact that i use vesafb-tng, but i dunno.

      --
      grey wolf
      LET FORTRAN DIE!
  14. Wouldn't it have been easier?-To stay put. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Are you kidding? That would require forethought, and research, and abandonment of the precious DirectX API! "

    Or the more likely truth, that it would require an investment in a miniscule market*, that's noted for it's strong aversion to all things proprietary.

    *A market that all commercial games have done poorly in so far.

    1. Re:Wouldn't it have been easier?-To stay put. by QuantaStarFire · · Score: 1
      *A market that all commercial games have done poorly in so far.

      Well, you have to figure that if companies such as id or Bioware can release Linux clients for their games, then why can't other companies follow suit? They're not exactly behemoths compared to, say, EA or Ubisoft, but they're well-known, and obviously they consider the platform important enough to develop for.

      How about server software? A lot of multiplayer games have Windows clients predominately, but they get both Windows and Linux server software. Why not just take the extra step, especially since the Linux server software wouldn't exist if it wasn't used?

      I guess the biggest problem is that you'd have to learn a whole new API, and seriously, what's wrong with that? People should be taking every effort to know more; it makes you more well-rounded and gives you something to add to your resume. Both aren't terribly bad things to aim for.

      I suppose if I spoke about Mac gaming that I might get a little support, but since OSX is BSD-based, how big of a stretch can it be to make a Linux-compatible version out of the Mac version, especially since you can no longer use "differences in the PPC architecture" as a valid argument? They're both Unix-based, after all.

    2. Re:Wouldn't it have been easier?-To stay put. by afd8856 · · Score: 1

      I think id and the others have an interest on having their engine run on more than one platform (think consoles). CivIV is still a PC only game.

      --
      I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
    3. Re:Wouldn't it have been easier?-To stay put. by Dave2+Wickham · · Score: 1
      id have ported their games since the original Doom, with the original Doom porter putting in the README:
      I did this 'cause Linux gives me a woody. It doesn't generate revenue. Please don't call or write us with bug reports. They cost us money, and I get sorta ragged on for wasting my time on UNIX ports anyway.

      (grab it yourself if you don't believe me). Of course, that was many years ago, however I doubt the profit motives have hugely changed since then.

      Epic believe that giving a Linux dedicated server but no client is unfair to Linux users, though I can't find the interview to back that up at the moment (and I've searched quite a bit).

      These are the two major game companies who tend to be most friendly to Linux, and in neither case does it appear to be for profit reasons, and that's why companies don't tend to write cross-platform code; they know DirectX, and they know that Win32 has the majority of the PC game playing public behind it.
  15. I just wish... by Khyber · · Score: 2, Funny

    Microsoft would bother trying to write a full DirectX port for Linux. Who knows? It may actually work for once, and there may be a boost in the software market, if perhaps it's done free. I'd buy software if I had the free tool to run it flawlessly on another OS. *Might have opened my mouth too late*

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    1. Re:I just wish... by fm6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft will not do anything to help Linux. It's the closest thing they have to actual competition.

    2. Re:I just wish... by Octorian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which really annoys me, because if they actually got off their Windows high-horse, they probably could sell application software for Linux.

      If they actually made "MS Office for Linux", and it was actually half-way decent, I wonder how many of us may actually buy it. (as in those of us for whom OpenOffice does *not* cover all the bases)

      Likewise, "Windows Media Player for Linux" would also be useful. I've got some stuff I need to watch that doesn't work in anything but real WMP. (ok, it does work in WMP for MacOSX, but doesn't work in that Flip4Mac thing MS is trying to push as a replacement)

    3. Re:I just wish... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      If they port DirectX to anything, they'll port it to OS X, for the following reasons:

      1) It's already been ported to both the CPU types Apple uses (PPC for the Xbox 360 and x86 forever.)

      2) Microsoft already has a rather large Macintosh development team making quality software for that platform. They don't have many employees who know Linux.

      3) Macintosh users are more likely to buy commercial software than Linux users. There are very few Macintosh-using open source zealots as compared to Linux-using open source zealots.

      4) Macintosh already has a better game industry than Linux. OS X gets probably twice the commercial game titles that Linux does in a given year. At least a couple Microsoft Game Studio titles have been released on OS X, none have been released on Linux.

    4. Re:I just wish... by fm6 · · Score: 1
      ... if they actually got off their Windows high-horse, they probably could sell application software for Linux.
      And so what? The Linux market is tiny, so it's not like they're losing a lot of money. And very few people would buy Microsoft applications because they had Linux version. People buy MS apps because they have to have that particular app, usually because all the people they work with also have that app.

      As things stand, someone who needs a Microsoft app, usually has to buy either Windows or MacOS to run it on. Almost always they choose Windows, so Microsoft has a total lock on the OS market. If Microsoft apps all ran on Linux, that lock would go away.

      It's not a high horse, it's a sound business strategy. Also a monopolistic one, which is why Microsoft should be forced to split into separate platform and application vendors.

    5. Re:I just wish... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If they actually made "MS Office for Linux", and it was actually half-way
      > decent, I wonder how many of us may actually buy it. (as in those of us
      > for whom OpenOffice does *not* cover all the bases)

      You should buy CrossOver Office: it runs Microsoft Office 2000, XP and most components of Office 2003.
      http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxoffice/suppo rted_apps/

      > Likewise, "Windows Media Player for Linux" would also be useful.

      CrossOver Office also supports Windows Media Player (it's version 6.4 but you can install the more recent codecs).

      And by buying CrossOver you would actually be supporting Wine development, unlike with Cedega subscriptions.

  16. Patchy crap? by phorm · · Score: 1

    What exactly qualifies as "patchy crap?" While I haven't always had Cedega work with my games, it tends to install under a fairly predictable folder structure, and it's never screwed up any of my other applications. As I'm a debian (testing/unstable) user, it installed easily and properly from the .deb file as well.

    If you want to talk about patches, try getting the same system to work stably and without constant patching on windows.

  17. Why WineX will never be as good by Myria · · Score: 4, Interesting

    People complain all the time about Cedega not being completely open-source. You can blame the DMCA and United States patent law for that.

    The problem is that almost every game is copy protected. Pretty much the *only* current popular games that are not are WoW and Guild Wars. (CD keys don't count as the copy protection I'm referring to here.)

    Because almost all modern copy protection systems rely on intimate details of Windows to make it difficult to crack - most of the modern ones even install kernel-mode device drivers - it is impossible to directly emulate/simulate the API closely enough that these protection schemes. As a result of this, you really have two choices:

    1. Disable the protection. This works well, but it is very time consuming. More importantly, it is in direct violation of the DMCA, a felony.

    2. Rewrite the protection. In this method, you implement the protection yourself, doing whatever CD check necessary and disabling the original protection scheme. This method has three legal problems:

    a. The protection schemes are usually patented by the protection companies.

    b. In order for this to work, you must disable the existing protection. Even though you are adding a protection system to replace it, the DMCA does not distinguish this, and so this is illegal.

    c. Implementing it yourself means that it will be unobfuscated. Anyone with the source - which is just about anyone - can edit out the check in your code and the protection is broken. The fact that the protection is severely weakened might be seen as a judge as violating the DMCA. Considering the way courts have decided lately, I'd say it's quite likely.

    The only legal solution is to have the protection companies make you a Linux version of the protection and/or describe how the system works so you can make a wrapper. There is absolutely no way this will happen without an NDA, something a fully open-source project cannot do.

    Cedega is the best we'll have as long as American law is the way it is now. Everything points to the laws becoming even more strict over time - we haven't even reached the apex of the pendulum swing.

    Melissa

    --
    "Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
    1. Re:Why WineX will never be as good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yeah, it's the DMCA's fault that Transgaming never contributed all of its non-copy protection code back to Wine, single-handedly forcing the Wine developers to switch licenses to prevent more parasitic behavior. It's the DMCA's fault that Transgaming went around threatening Debian and Gentoo for making builds of their public CVS available, despite the code not containing any of that copy protection stuff anyway. It's not that Transgaming isn't just a bunch of opportunistic fuckers at all.

    2. Re:Why WineX will never be as good by twakar · · Score: 1

      Considering that Transgaming is a Canadian company, based out of Toronto.. I fail to see how the DMCA applies to them. It may apply to persons using such software in the U.S., but the rest of the world should be relatively safe until all politicians can be bought so cheaply (which may or may not happen).

      --
      Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity!
  18. Centre Stage by cloricus · · Score: 1

    WINE is still not ready for centre stage in that regard, yet...Though it is looking more like Cedega was just the warm up act as WINE(hq) and Xover Office will both soon have rather impressive implimentations of directx. I say this as a long time Linux gamer (three and a bit years now of no freelancer ): and a long time pirate (and more recently subscriber) to Cedega (I sold my soul in exchange for a stable way to play Eve Online...).

    Just an update on gaming in general under Linux - at the last LAN a fellow Debian user and myself managed to keep up with every game the Windows users installed at played using a combination of native games, Cedega 4.x and 5.x, and WINE. I will enjoy the day when I can remove the horrid taint from my system (Cedega) and be able to game with only native or WINE run games. :)

    --
    I ate your fish.
    1. Re:Centre Stage by Slashcrap · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      I will enjoy the day when I can remove the horrid taint from my system (Cedega) and be able to game with only native or WINE run games. :)

      Oh right, but you don't mind tainting your system with cracked games? Because those are the only ones you're going to be running with vanilla WINE. WINE doesn't include the code for working round the various protection mechanisms. Some is being added, but it's never going to get much development effort because of the legal problems. Cedega does, but the code can't be released due to the DMCA. Did you even know you can download all of the Cedega source minus the copy protection bits?

      So you consider it a "horrible taint" to your system because of the feature that actually makes it work.

      And because of your fucked up software idealism you're either going to end up running cracked games or no games.

      It may also come as a surprise to find out that those games you're playing aren't released under the GPL either (even the Linux native ones). How the fuck do those not taint your system?

      I can see you've given this a lot of thought. Shame you forgot about that whole reality thing.

    2. Re:Centre Stage by arakon · · Score: 1

      How does EVE run under Cedega? Honestly its one of the few games keeping my windows box intact. Honestly the client is a bit buggy in windows sometimes.

      --
      "If I were bound by all laws everywhere I'm sure I would have committed a capital crime somewhere."
    3. Re:Centre Stage by jdgreen7 · · Score: 1

      Wow, someone's a bit hostile.... The main problem people have with Cedega is that it forked the original WINE code and has made a decision to never give back to the original WINE community. While this was perfectly legal under the old license, it's still kinda sleazy and rubs people the wrong way. TransGaming has done a lot for getting games to run under Linux, but WINE has done much more over the years. People still have a problem with leechers in any market, and they kinda fit the bill on that. If you really want to support Open Source, give money to Codeweavers instead of TG. Or, donate your time and help make vanilla WINE better. Or, only play open source games.

    4. Re:Centre Stage by SQLz · · Score: 1
      The main problem people have with Cedega is that it forked the original WINE code and has made a decision to never give back to the original WINE community.

      I'm too lazy to do this now but if you cat the Wine development change logs there are plenty of submissions from Transgaming. So, I guess that myth is...busted.

    5. Re:Centre Stage by cloricus · · Score: 1

      Eve runs acceptably if: you have a newer generation nvidia graphics card (I have a 6600gt and I recommend some thing similar or better), a recent version of cedega, and a bit of time to sit down and get it working. These days it basically works out of the box and CCP seem to have altered a few things that make it more playable under Linux (not sure they knew that they were doing it) and the only two major things now is that you cannot press ESC (crashes the game) and the warp graphics aren't as clear as they are in windows (can be an advantage but doesn't look as pretty). Some jump gates still cause crashes if you don't fly in a specific manor around them (there are three currently known to do this out of the 15,000 odd so it's not really a problem). Check the Cedega wiki.

      --
      I ate your fish.
    6. Re:Centre Stage by cloricus · · Score: 1

      WINE supports cd copy protection already, it isn't as good as Cedega's or Xover Offices but it will be in the near future. I'm not sure how you thought I wouldn't know that after I stated that I've been a Linux gamer for several years now... And yes the games I play are not (all) free software so in theory they (to a limited extent) taint my system, though contary to your useless assumptions I'm not a free software nut. My dislike for Transgaming comes from their history with the opensource community and little else.

      If you were even slightly smart you would realise I have to use the nvidia binary drivers in the first place to get direct rendering so before I even start my kernel is tainted. Idiot trolls...Really...

      --
      I ate your fish.
  19. DirectX on OS X by Phantasmo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe Microsoft should try to beat Cedega to the punch and port DirectX to Mac OS X? They could sell it for $30 per major revision, with free updates in between to keep things in sync with Windows. MS could start losing some serious business if Cedega ever gets "good enough" (although this doesn't seem to be the case so far).
    Also, if it was done really well, it would discourage the development of native OS X games, which I'm sure they'd see as a nice bonus.

    --

    The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
  20. I'm not a shill by nikanj · · Score: 1

    But Cedega works fine for me. Most of the problems on this thread seem to indicate bad drivers *cough*ati*cough* and there's nothing Transgaming can do to help you. Why Linux drivers aren't always good and why they are sometimes a pain in the arse to configure *cough*fglrxconfig*cough* is a matter we should be discussing next. -Lauri

  21. ATI Bugzilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  22. Not really true... by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    If you are in X an are running gaming apps that grab control of the mouse and keyboard, and the application locks solid, you are usually locked right out of X altogether. *Sometimes* you can still CTRL-ALT-F(1-4) to get to a terminal, but more often than not, you need to reboot.

    Sure, in theory you could probably SSH into your PC from somewhere else and kill X and re-start it, but not everyone has another PC in the house to do that with, and even if you do, it is probably far simpler and faster to just reboot than walk around the house to do that.

    1. Re:Not really true... by n0d3 · · Score: 1

      Or use the power button. I have acpid installed just for that, when it locks, i can atleast safley shut it down. If you can't use acpid then sshing won't give you much result either I suppose.

      Back on topic,
      I had about 10days uptime, playing WoW with cedega for many hours (seriously, this is getting bad), but it did freeze on me. No keyboard response et al. Normally if the game crashes, i can always change virtual desktop. I do concider my PC to be pretty stable. But closed src ATi drivers, can make life ... interesting to say the least.

    2. Re:Not really true... by Sparr0 · · Score: 1

      And you can always resort to ctrl-alt-backspace before you reboot.

  23. I will care when by Ravenscall · · Score: 1

    They announce they have full DX 9, Pixel Shader, and Hardware TnL support.

    Until then, I will keep Windows for games so I can actually get the use out of my graphics card that I payed for.

    --
    You say you want a revolution....
  24. Re:Wouldn't it have been easier? NOPE by frankie · · Score: 1
    if companies such as id or Bioware can release Linux clients for their games

    ... except for two significant details:

    1. John Carmack is a programming god who loves OpenGL for philosophical reasons, and therefore intentionally writes highly portable code. Most other companies do not have anyone who even vaguely approaches that description.
    2. Bioware committed to writing ONE triple-compatible game (NWN) before they even started coding, however the Mac & Linux clients came out LONG after the Windows release, and the toolset remains Windows-only. Furthermore, none of their followup titles are *nix-compatible. If Bioware could release Linux clients for their games (plural), then perhaps we should consider why is it that they DON'T?
  25. Windows Emulation software is bloated. by grammer · · Score: 1

    I'd much rather run Windows so as to run Win32 API software packages. Considering the fact that _most_ binaries run better on their native OS aswell, along with the fact that only ignorance would bring about one not running windows at all. However, although some prefer Unix based OSes and refuse beyond all measure to run Windows, I think it educates one when you delve between both parties. This is, however my opinion.

    --
    Don't confuse kindness with cowardice.
  26. interesting but... by Devir · · Score: 1

    why go through so much trouble to run a modern game? I've always ran linux/*BSD along side a Windows machine. The Windows machine was for my gaming since it was a no brainer worry free solution.

    When i could only afford 1 machine i'd dual boot. Linux for 1 thing and windows for gaming. Emulators and the likes are just too much a burden for me when the hardware/OS is so readily available. Dont want to give money to MS? Fine risk FBI visitations from pirating. In the end limiting yourself to a single OS is just that limiting. Each one is a tool and has a purpose. Windows = great gaming, easy to install and run.

    THe irony here is i used Windows 98 for years. What cause me to upgrade to XP 3 years later was a sinple game... Xwing Alliance. It kept crashing on me to the point i shelved it one day. A few years later i wanted to play it again and it crashed my 98 machine a few times. Out of pure spite I installed Windows XP and SP1. To be honiest I've been very satisfied with the results. I could complete Xwing Alliance without a single crash in XP. It's now the mainstay of my Gaming life. I am a hardcore gamer through and through.

  27. My thoughts on Cedega by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

    I'm a relatively new subscriber to Cedega -- I actually bought a HP workstation and installed Ubuntu for the sole purpose of running WoW under Cedega (my 400MHz Mac ain't gonna cut it) -- and I've been not unimpressed by it. I'm not going to say "wow, it's great!", but in my experience it's worked okay.

    They definitely move from one "most popular" title to the next, and I've never been clear on exactly how many people they have working on it at any one time (it could be one guy, it could be 50 people, you'd not have any clue from their forums or site), but the end result works works okay for my purposes, given that WoW is really popular right now.

    Getting it to work initially can be frustrating, though. I had a LOT of issues getting WoW to work (some weird mouse-clicking issue), and eventually fixed it by running with certain configuration options. Every time Blizzard puts out a new version, it's a crapshoot -- it might continue to work fine, or I might have to spend an afternoon tweaking its config files again.

    Eventually I'm just going to buy a new Mac, and at that point I'll probably stop bothering with Cedega: I don't have any Windows-only games that I want to play -- I'm a one-game-at-a-time guy, and right now that game is WoW. I do appreciate that it exists though, and I might even consider continuing to support TransGaming for a while even if I wasn't actively using Cedega, just so I can keep voting for games I might be interested in playing in the future (once they reach the bargain bin at CompUSA).

    It's $5 a month, and it doesn't make me feel like I'm kneeling down and sucking Microsoft's collective cock and running Windows every time I want to play a game. To me, that's worth it.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  28. the exact games i play, civ 4 + nfsmw omfg !111!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    damn how did they know, these are the only games i need winxp for. !!!
    w000t
    i'm going to count all my pennies and see if i can afford a copy this pay.

    noiche noiche noiche

  29. Civilisation 4 on x86 GNU/Linux (civ4linux) by The+Original+Yama · · Score: 1

    Anyone interested in playing Civilisation 4 on x86 GNU/Linux ought to visit http://www.civ4linux.com/.

  30. You can buy OEM by snuf23 · · Score: 1

    You can get the OEM version of Windows XP Professional for $137 from NewEgg. It is NOT tied to hardware. Now if you use this you can't call Microsoft for technical support - but who ever does that?
    The best reason to run Cedega is that you don't want to run Microsoft software at all and you consider this important enough that you don't mind messing to get a game working on Linux. And of course realizing that some games won't ever run under Linux.
    Another similar option would be gaming on a Mac. You reduce the total number of games available to you (including some that work on Cedega) but you don't have to purchase/install/maintain a Windows partition.
    It's all about trade offs.

    --
    Sometimes my arms bend back.
    1. Re:You can buy OEM by Trelane · · Score: 1
      You can get the OEM version of Windows XP Professional for $137 from NewEgg. It is NOT tied to hardware.

      Incorrect. Quoth the Microsoft Get the Bare Facts about Acquiring PCs Without Preinstalled Operating Systems (8th hit I got on googel for "oem license site:microsoft.com"):

      OEM licenses for Microsoft operating system software are not transferable from one machine to another, even if the PC on which it was originally installed is no longer in use. The OEM license is tied to the original PC on which it was installed.
      --

      --
      Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
    2. Re:You can buy OEM by snuf23 · · Score: 1

      What I mean is that the CD install is not tied to specific hardware. You can install the OEM version on any system, it isn't checking the key to something in the hardware as to whether it will install or not.
      As for reinstalling on a new machine, you aren't supposed to, but of course there are ways around that if you don't care about breaking the terms of the license. Otherwise you are looking at buying a copy every time you get a new computer, which may be once a year or once every 10 years depending on how often you replace your computer.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    3. Re:You can buy OEM by Trelane · · Score: 1
      As for reinstalling on a new machine, you aren't supposed to, but of course there are ways around that if you don't care about breaking the terms of the license.
      Breaking the terms of the license is what gets people in trouble with the BSA and may result in heavy fines. While they've not sued any home users TMK (or at least not enough to get attention anyway), license issues get businesses in trouble pretty regularly. And Microsoft (and others) can audit you at any time!

      Additionally, product activation should help stop this, to an extent.

      Otherwise you are looking at buying a copy every time you get a new computer, which may be once a year or once every 10 years depending on how often you replace your computer.
      Yes. This is one of the costs of using Windows. Trying to skip this cost may be expensive and illegal. Don't expect me to feel sorry for you if you get burned for it.

      Doubly so, since many of these installs would be Linux or BSD or another non-Windows OS, had the person not pirated Windows.

      --

      --
      Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
    4. Re:You can buy OEM by snuf23 · · Score: 1

      OK - so you really think MS is going to bust a home user for running an OEM copy of Windows on two machines? Really???? The worst I could imagine them doing is making it so you can't run windows update or something.
      I'm not advocating breaking the license. Certainly not for businesses. Honestly though in terms of the case we were dicussing, home user dual booting to play games, I can't possibly imagine MS busting someone for that.
      But lets say you change out your computer once every five years. That's a whole $28/year for the OS cost. Whooo. What a huge "Microsoft Tax". Let's say you update your computer twice as often, that's a big
      $56/year for Windows. Now if you want to subscribe to Cedega, it's $60/year.
      Sorry I just don't see the OS cost as a big deal. Don't run Windows if you don't want do deal with a Windows installation but not running it because of cost is just silly. If you can afford to buy the games in the first place you can afford to buy the OS.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    5. Re:You can buy OEM by Trelane · · Score: 1
      OK - so you really think MS is going to bust a home user for running an OEM copy of Windows on two machines?
      It's really only a matter of time.
      The worst I could imagine them doing is making it so you can't run windows update or something.
      There are any number of things they could do, the least of which is cutting off your Windows Update. Have a fingerprint scanner? A camera? They can do anything, since they control the OS and have little to no oversight. I'm not saying they're doing any of these things, nor that they will do any of these things, but the point is that they can do these things, and there's little people can do to prevent it. Doubly so given how entrenched their monopolies are.
      I'm not advocating breaking the license.
      Actually, you are, though you try to be suave about it.
      Honestly though in terms of the case we were dicussing, home user dual booting to play games, I can't possibly imagine MS busting someone for that.
      Your lack of imagination does not imply a lack of reality.

      To Microsoft, those are piracy (and lost sales), and they're starting to try to crack down on that. I'm not saying they're gonna bust into your house tomorrow, but expect the temperature of the water to slowly keep rising. They're in business to make money, not for your pleasure.

      But lets say you change out your computer once every five years. That's a whole $28/year for the OS cost. Whooo. What a huge "Microsoft Tax". Let's say you update your computer twice as often, that's a big $56/year for Windows. Now if you want to subscribe to Cedega, it's $60/year.
      Quite true, for (non-transferrable) OEM Windows licenses, and if you decide you want to stay subscribed all year (again, you can pay the USD15 minimum and just get the software updates for 3 months; the software doesn't expire).

      However, Cedega and Linux can be transferred between PCs at will while the OEM Windows license cannot, and this was the entirety of my point. In fact, in my original posting, I even said, "That said, yes, it'd likely be cheaper (and better-functioning) in the long run to just buy Windows." . (and, actually, I should have said "short run", not "long run". The optimal long-term solution is to buy games for whatever platform you want to be running.)

      Sorry I just don't see the OS cost as a big deal. Don't run Windows if you don't want do deal with a Windows installation but not running it because of cost is just silly. If you can afford to buy the games in the first place you can afford to buy the OS.
      The cost was never my argument. Only that OEM Windows isn't the same as retail Windows, and there is a price discrepancy.

      Personally, I find that dual-booting to Windows (and therefore having to quit everything I'm doing) to be too annoying to be worth it. Plus, I find Windows takes up far more hard drive space than it's worth (and before you cry out that I'm some rabid zealot, I'll qualify that with "to me, since I barely use it at all.")

      --

      --
      Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.