Slashdot Mirror


Blizzard Reportedly Planning A Linux Game For 2013

It looks like the recent success of Linux gaming has caught Blizzard's eye. According to "a reliable source at the company" 2013 will be the year that "at least one of their very popular titles will see a release for Ubuntu Linux." From the article: "It's been a poorly-kept secret that Blizzard has a native Linux client of World of Warcraft. As recently as 2011, the World of Warcraft Linux client was still being maintained internally. The client has been around for years and done by their own developers as a form of testing for the popular MMORPG currently offered on Windows and Mac OS X. As for why they haven't released the client, it's come down to "targeting a specific version of the platform" with Linux being "unstandardized" due to the many different distributions. There's still some fundamental problems with gaming on Linux. With World of Warcraft working generally fine under Wine as well, the company is further unmotivated to officially support a Linux build of the game."

26 of 353 comments (clear)

  1. Gee haven't heard that before... by redmid17 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    FTA: " As for why they haven't released the client, it's come down to "targeting a specific version of the platform" with Linux being "unstandardized" due to the many different distributions." Just do what valve does. I mean I'm not going to be playing WoW, but millions do.

    1. Re:Gee haven't heard that before... by WrecklessSandwich · · Score: 3, Insightful

      with Linux being "unstandardized" due to the many different distributions."

      Of course, Windows has a similar number of different major "distributions" -- XP, 2003, 2008, 7, 8, Vista, etc.

      You're comparing apples to oranges. Supporting multiple versions of one OS does not equate to supporting different Linux distributions. Supporting Windows back to XP is more like supporting Ubuntu going back many versions (pre-4.10 if you want to do it by year, but if you want to normalize for number of OS versions you could go by what Canonical supports and start with 10.04 LTS).

    2. Re:Gee haven't heard that before... by dougmc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You're comparing apples to oranges. Supporting multiple versions of one OS does not equate to supporting different Linux distributions. Supporting Windows back to XP is more like supporting Ubuntu going back many versions (pre-4.10 if you want to do it by year, but if you want to normalize for number of OS versions you could go by what Canonical supports and start with 10.04 LTS).

      See, this isn't about "normalizing", it's about differences and how difficult they are to write code to work with and support.

      A modern (within the last few years) Fedora vs a modern Debian is very roughly about as different as XP vs Windows 7 (at least from the point of view of writing a program to run on them), and really, most of the compatibility problems with Linux distributions can be resolved by simply making a statically linked executable or including all the shared libraries that you need rather than assuming that they're part of the OS. (The Linux version of .dll hell, as it were, but at least they're not installed in a system directory to mess up other programs.)

      I guess the problem becomes much larger if Blizzard tries to support Linux distributions going back to when XP was introduced (2001) but considering that they don't even support the original version of XP any more and instead require the most recent service pack even that's not a fair comparison. For the most part, supporting multiple Linux distributions aren't that bad -- the problems come in how 3D acceleration is handled, but even then you can pick a few systems and say you support them and not others. (For example, the open source Nvidia drivers probably don't perform well enough, when the binary blob drivers do, so support the latter but not the former.)

    3. Re:Gee haven't heard that before... by Beetjebrak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just release it for the most popular distro(-family), which is undeniably Ubuntu (covering Debian and Mint as well). The geeks will get it to work on everything else, no support needed or they wouldn't be using non-Ubuntu or non-Mint Linux anyway. As long as Blizzard provides builds for Ubuntu LTS x86 and amd64, the rest will be done for them.

      --
      Learn from the mistakes of others. There isn't enough time to make them all yourself.
    4. Re:Gee haven't heard that before... by Beetjebrak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      6 isn't that far-fetched. You have Debian and its many derivatives which are extremely similar under the hood, RedHat and its seven dwarfs which will manage with the same RPM, OpenSUSE and a few oddballs like Arch, Gentoo and Slackware. If Blizzard supports these, the rest of the world will support itself right up to FreeBSD and back as long as Blizzard provides both x86 and amd64 builds and lets us know what libs they link against.

      --
      Learn from the mistakes of others. There isn't enough time to make them all yourself.
    5. Re:Gee haven't heard that before... by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's called hedging your bet. With the future of Windows as a major consumer OS up in there, and with the likelihood of a Linux-based gaming platform on the horizon, it seems an awfully good idea to get your developers, particularly your platform developers, thinking in terms of portability. That way, whoever the ultimate winners in the consumer market are, you didn't fuck up your own success by backing the horse that didn't even show.

      It isn't 2005 anymore, and Redmond isn't the only game in town.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    6. Re:Gee haven't heard that before... by deek · · Score: 3, Informative

      They don't even need to target a distribution. Statically link the binaries, release them as a tar.gz, under the provisio that they are not officially supported, but issues can be reported in some forum. Let the distributions do the work of packaging it. The world (of warcraft) is your oyster, or whatever other mollusc takes your fancy.

  2. Too Late by 89cents · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Blizzard used to by favorite gaming company. Now I loathe them. The recent huge disappointment of Diablo 3, the no LAN play in SC2, and with how I heard they seriously dumbed down WoW, Blizzard won't be getting anymore of my money.

    1. Re:Too Late by geek · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not to mention them trying to force people into using that real ID system which back fired so badly. I blame Activision for all of this. Blizzard was great until that merger.

    2. Re:Too Late by 89cents · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed, but the fall of Blizzard started with the closure of Blizzard North, a few years before the Activision merger.

    3. Re:Too Late by wiggles · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nope, they were going down hill long before the Activision merger.

  3. Incompetence by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's only "unstandardised" if you want to link against every last library.

    If you treat it like OSX or Windows and ship all necessary dylibs/DLLs which aren't provided by default then it works fine.

    Somehow companies like Mathworks have been managing this happily for well over a decade without making up weird claims about standardisation. Oh and hey, I've done it too. It's easy.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  4. Gee haven't heard that before by decora · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I used to be like you, complaining that it was 'no big deal' to release a linux game. What could possibly be so hard about it? OpenGL, write once, run anywhere! Then ... I met GLX. And the documentation on opengl.org. And Gallium / LLVM. and Mesa. and ... well. i just try not to think about it too much. The doctors say I should be OK... eventually...

    1. Re:Gee haven't heard that before by flayzernax · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The ironic thing is to run on mac really well they already have decent GL support, not everyone is forced to use mesa libs anymore those are really a thing of the past and depricated, NVIDIA kernal modules come witht heir own set of those very same libs which are basically everywhere on every linux gamers desktops.

      In essense they already have to cater to the specs of the vid card venders and what libs they prefer their hardware works with. So your argument is invalid for a big corp with devs who are very experienced in dealing with just that problem.

      For a garage startup it sure is a big problem to get a good 3D engine going. But for starts you can do something with SDL libs which are fucking fantastic across all platforms.

    2. Re:Gee haven't heard that before by astro · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think it's time to dispel the notion that "...there aren't a lot of technically inept people running Linux as a desktop at home." This is simply not as true as it used to be. I have a growing number of friends running Linux on their single computer that is used by the whole family. These people are generally FAR from technically adept. Why are they running Linux? They can't afford Windows any more. As Windows has become harder to pirate, the required hardware has become more expensive, and with the advent of many small shops or non-profits selling very inexpensive, turn-on-and-it-works Linux systems, I am seeing it much more commonly in homes of average or below technical aptitude.

      The scary economy is actually driving people to FOSS, in my subjective experience.

  5. Support by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Guys, you're missing the point being made here. It's not that the application can't run under different flavors -- it's about supporting them. Every distribution has its own quirks, its own packaging manager, its own set of libraries that are included (and some that aren't). It's a support nightmare. Rather than writing installation instructions once, you have to write it a dozen times. Versions change constantly. Everybody here has experienced the joys of googling for someone's hack script to get something working... a patch here, a tweak there... yes, it's possible.

    But from a support perspective, it's difficulty level = nightmare trying to help these people. And they'll expect your help. You just gave them a major application and said it works with Linux... so you better know every flavor, every variation, every configuration possible. And that, right there, is why Blizzard hasn't jumped on the Linux bandwagon -- too many support variables.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Support by hduff · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They could release a generic, runs-most-anywhere installation bundled with all the correct libraries, specifying minimum storage,memory, videocard, kernel/glibc requirements (just like for a Windows release).

      If they want to limit support, pick the top 5 distros and make certain it runs on those out-ofthe-box. Everything else is "at your own risk". Other software companies have some model for this so it can't be that difficult.

      --
      "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  6. Re:No future by Nerdfest · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It will most likely work fine with Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, etc, as well as Mint and Debian. Linux dependency management is very mature, and there will likely be minimal problems getting it working on other distributions.

  7. Re:No future by arth1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Gaming for Linux (or, more specifically, binary blobs in Linux) have absolutely no future, since every distro has its own version of every library.

    You know, you look at this the exact wrong way.
    Linux can allow the game distributor to provide the exact versions of the libraries they want. All you need to do is plop them all into one directory, say $INSTALL_DIR/lib/, and then have the wrapper run script prepend that directory to LD_LIBRARY_PATH.

    And if that wasn't enough, the games company can even provide a bootable Linux DVD or USB stick which boots into linux and starts the game. Can't have much more control over the OS software than that!

  8. Re:Linux model needs changing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Realize I was dumb for buying an ATI graphics card?

  9. Re:No it isn't by jedidiah · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There are even new installers for old Loki games that follow this same exact "support yourself" model. All Valve or Blizzard has to do is get out of the way enough to allow the community to do it's thing.

    Some power user for the random obscure distribution of your choice will gladly do the legwork for you if you don't put up legal barriers.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  10. About that dumbing down... by Moraelin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well, before I start, I'm not (or rather for a long while no longer) a WoW fan, but I did briefly try it again recently. So, you know, I'm only having a superficial impression. I don't think I'll bother much with it, but...

    I think that as far as "dumbing down" goes, it really sounds worse than it really is, when you do the Vulcan thing and think about it logically.

    1. Most of the stuff you'll only notice if you've played it before and have any particular attachment (even if just for nostalgia sake) about the old system. Truth is, I most other recent games are just about as "dumbed down".

    You can play TOR for example as a DPS Trooper with little more than Grav Round, Full Auto and High Impact Bolt as the only three buttons you'll ever have to press. Heck, you could play it with Grav Round only, if you don't mind losing a little DPS. Trust me, that's actually less skill needed than WoW even now. (And obviously the Bounty Hunter is the same deal, just with different names on the buttons you press.)

    2. For that matter, it's not really dumber than WoW used to be to start with. Anyone remember the pre-Burning Crusade raids that some classes only needed one button to get through? Ironically, for all its reputation of a noob class, the Hunter was technically the most "complex" to play since it needed a whole THREE buttons. Yeah, you also needed to set the hunter mark and send the pet, so, yeah, that's a whole two whole extra buttons :p

    (Not to mention you had more typing or talking to do than the raid leader, what with having to tell everyone that yes, the pet was on passive, every time anything went wrong, no matter who started it or what actually happened. You could be still running back from the cemetery when the rest of the group did something stupid, and they'd still insist that it's somehow the pet not being on passive that caused it. I mean, it wasn't even in the dungeon, but it must have caused it. Somehow.;))

    Yeah, it didn't really start as a sort of modern day chess or go or other complex thinking game. Nor had the geekiest and smartest population. Really, it was from the start a game that 6 year olds can master.

    So let's get on to what really changed:

    3. So now for a bunch of quests you don't have to run back to the quest giver to get the next step of it. Well, it takes some getting used to it, but at the end of the day, it's not like running back and forth was actually the fun part.

    4. You don't have to keep buying skill upgrades every 2 levels; they now increase in effect with your level. Not only it's like how a bunch of other games were working already (e.g., COH), but basically if you've been on the game long enough to have a valid whine about being used to the old system... guess what? Paying a few coppers to buy the skills on a new alt wasn't really a balance factor any more anyway.

    Plus, again, running back to wherever your trainer was, and then back, was hardly something that added any fun.

    5. The talent trees. Well, the issue with those is two-fold:

    A) Most people were going for cookie-cutter builds from some site anyway. Not just in COH, but generally. Whether it's actually talent trees (e.g., TOR, RIFT, etc) or putting points in some skill (e.g., STO), most people just want something that works, not to solve a puzzle. If there had been some way to tell the computer "just go by this build off that site" automatically, most people would have just done it. And in effect that's what the new system does.

    B) You haven't actually lost much. In addition to the choice every 15 levels now, many of which are actually new extras, a bunch of the old talents everyone took for a given spec are now automatic passive skills, that you get automatically when reaching a certain level. So, you know, you haven't actually lost them or anything, and they were not that much of a choice in the first place anyway. Now you just get them automatically instead of having to click through the tree.

    C) Basically it doesn't let you mak

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  11. Re:No it isn't by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You sir, get it. Everyone else is busy banging pots and pans saying "We can do it ourselves!" but that's not really the point. Anytime you release an application onto a platform, you're going to get people who say everything else works just fine, so it must be your application. Enter technical support. Think about taking a phone call where the problem is that their video driver needs to be reinstalled. Under windows, this is merely painful and requires a couple reboots -- 15 minute call. Under Linux, it could require a kernel recompilation, editing files in /etc, and downloading and installing dozens of dependent packages ahead of that. That's two hours of work.

    So one linux call costs the equivalent manpower of eight windows callers. For a support manager, that's a scary proposition, and they do not give a damn how many people know what they're doing -- those aren't the people they're going to be supporting! It's going to be the guy who just downloaded Debian because he heard "It supports world of warcraft" on the web forums, and by god, he's going to make it work now. And he doesn't have a clue.

    Blizzard's target market is not slashdot readers who can list out all the arguments for the 'ls' command and can do sed and awk scripts in their sleep. Blizzard is looking at the guy who "heard about it on the internet"... and that guy's going to make some poor bastard in tech support utterly miserable.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  12. That is usually the problem by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At this point, the nVidia binary driver is the only driver out there that provides what you get on Windows, which is to say all the latest features, good speed, and stability. Anything else makes compromises of varying amounts. Now for a simple game, this might be ok. Some games stick with 2D, use SDL, and call it a day. They'll work with the SVGA X server if it comes to that, perhaps just with some tearing/slow graphics. However for a modern 3D game that makes use of some fancy features, that doesn't cut it.

    Well that situation is a problem. For one it is a problem simply because not everyone has an nVidia card but then of course there's the whole religious crusade some people have against closed source, particularly with regards to drivers.

    With pro applications, you can just say "Quadro or GTFO" and require the binary driver. People will deal with it. With this? All it would do is get them all kinds of hate mail.

    Also, funny enough, when you talk OpenGL, nVidia is the only one who really does it well in Windows too. Not long ago at work we had a system that was running HFSS. That does not require OpenGL, but will use it if available to accelerate graphics. The system had an ass slow graphics card (it was a server repurposed to be a workstation basically) and so a new video card was wanted. We picked up a cheap AMD 7000 series card... and ran in to a strange problem: In remote desktop, HFSS worked fine. On the system itself, no dice.

    After going around and around a sneaking suspicion creeped up on me. I pulled the AMD card and stuck in an nVidia card. Everything started working.

    nVidia produces top flight OpenGL drivers, which on Windows are as fast as their Driect3D drivers (which are really fast). Everyone else... much more hit or miss.

  13. Re:No future by spikestabber · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Steam works great in Gentoo Linux, I would expect Gentoo to be the absolute worst to get it running on, but it works!

  14. Re:The F Word by celle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "systemd can go die in a fire along with it's retarded friend d-bus."

        And don't forget the tentacled friend pulse-audio.