Slashdot Mirror
Why Aren't More Linux Users Gamers?
tops writes "MadPenguin.org wonders why more Linux users aren't gamers and attempts to answer that question. The article suggests, 'As far as I'm concerned, it all comes down to a choice. Expect the gaming industry to follow the Linux doctrine or instead, build up a viable, cross platform gaming market that includes us, the Linux users.' The article urges publishers to consider Linux users as a viable market, and requests that game developers target Linux as a platform during the pre-production phase." What do you think are the most important obstacles barring the big game publishers from reaching out to the Linux market more than they already do?
Disclaimer/Plug: I don't work in the video games industry, but I have close ties to a few people who do. Also, I've written my own cross-platform game engine or game development framework that allows OpenGL and Direct3D to be used interchangeably as the rendering engine.
So, with ever improving cross-platform middleware, why are game developers still ignoring Linux, by and large? If they can target Windows XP, Windows Vista, XBox 360, PS2, PS3, and Wii with one title, surely Linux couldn't be hard to add it the list. I'll tell you, it isn't because game developers know how to use Direct3D only or that OpenGL is no good.
When I questioned a friend in the industry about it, he said in the end that the only real reason for ignoring Linux is the time and cost of testing another platform. If they aren't going to profit enough from the release to pay the additional testers required, they won't even break even on the venture. The fact is, testing procedures require much work duplication across different platforms, even when the code doesn't need to be rewritten or significantly modified. So, from what I understand, it all comes down to testing cost.
Insert self-referential sig here.
While your post may not have been off-topic, the link he posted *can* be seen. I just clicked on it and here's the first few lines from the text:
"Million of Halo 2 fans/Windows XP users are rejoicing due to the fact that yesterday, a team of hackers known as "Razor1911 released a patch that allowed Windows XP users to install Halo 2 on their PC. A while back Falling Leaf Systems announced that they were to release compatibility drivers legally so that XP users can play Halo 2, but Razor1911 claimed that they beat them too it, and there's no doubt that they're right. Although there are still compatibility issues with the new patch, Halo 2 does run on most Windows XP machines, mostly in single player mode - there have been many complaints regarding the online multiplayer. Razor1911 has also released a re-pack pirated version of Halo 2 that should run better than the original Vista DVD, which included the patch with it. Along with Halo 2, Razor1911 has also released an XP patch for Shadowrun."
Oh yah, it also seems like you were wrong about Halo II being Vista only....
"We'll need 2000 crickets, 4 cans of Easy Cheese, and the fluid from 18 glowsticks for this plan to work...." - ph0n1c
hmmm
Case & PSU $100
CPU $200 (for a really good one)
Mobo $75
RAM $50 (for 2GB)
HDD $100 (for 500GB)
GPU $200 (for REALLY Good one)
throw in the peripherals and other junk for about $100.00 and you are still well short of the $1000-1500 mark.
And with the ability to buy a Quad-core dell with 22" monitor and all kinds of GPU for about $700 almost every month on some special or another....
I fail to see how this is true.......
"I'm looking at a $1000-1500 box at a minimum"
1. Take a brand new Computer that has XP and a fast core 2 duo (Researching the fact that you aren't buying a non-upgradable lump of garbage like HP/Dell). ~$600
2. Upgrade RAM to 2 GB ~$60 pessimistically
3. Get a smoking graphics card ~200-250
Total price: $900 or 30% more than what you were going to pay for anyways; That and a few days of passive specs analysis and 10 minutes installation time.
"upgrade at least once every 3 years"
If you're telling me that better games hit PC's more often, then point proven. If you're telling me that The same games you're running on your 3 year obsolete PC are now magically able to run on your 6 year old console, you're missing the point. Consoles are early into this generation and PC graphics have already long past their hardware specs. There is nowhere for consoles to grow for another 4 years in your words.
But for PC's, if you really want a super duper bleeding edge piece of gaming godness, you can, but by no means do 'most' game devs shove ridiculously high requirements down your throat.
I have a good rig in my eyes and I've spent a total of maybe $1000 over the 5 years that I've had it. That is not to say that all I do is game day in and out, it gets good use for many things like hi-def video (as its also a PVR / media PC).
"Heck, the wii demonstrates that you can make a compelling gaming environment on pretty low end hardware"
I absolutely love my Wii to death for the games that I play on it, but lets be frank, the CPU/GPU/lack of substantial storage hold it back from competing seriously in many gaming market segments.
What I can agree to is that Linux gaming really isn't there yet, both in developer support and in market share. Developers interested in Linux work should take the approach of companies like ID/Epic and use/develop technology platforms which makes cross-platform porting simple. Since you need OpenGL pipelines for PS3's anyways, why not spend a little developer time to release an unsupported Linux client? Better yet, if there's a big pull on Linux then you may want to consider actually supporting it. But at this point I'd say Linux gamers will settle for 99% working binaries over waiting a year for Wine support.
Bye!
"Here's the thing, if I buy a PC to play DVD's, browse the Internet, etc, I can get something for $400-600 that does the job adequately. However, that system will not play games. If I want to play games I'm looking at a $1000-1500 box at a minimum"
Not always true. Seems a lot of people think you have to have the top of the line system to play video games. I've played Shadowbane, EQII, WOW and Vanguard all on a Crappy E-Machines with a 9800 Pro. So, we are talking about $600 for a machine that has lasted me about 6 years now.
Granted, I don't have the best graphics.. But then, my little e-machines with the 9800 pro handled 400 person + Banes on shadowbane better then my friends much much more expensive computers.
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment