Slashdot Mirror
Battlefield Director: Linux Only Needs One 'Killer' Game To Explode
dryriver writes with an except from Polygon's interview with DICE creative directory Lars Gustavsson, who says it would only take one "killer" game for Linux to break into mainstream gaming (something some would argue it already has): "We strongly want to get into Linux for a reason," Gustavsson said. "It took Halo for the first Xbox to kick off and go crazy — usually, it takes one killer app or game and then people are more than willing [to adopt it] — it is not hard to get your hands on Linux, for example, it only takes one game that motivates you to go there." "I think, even then, customers are getting more and more convenient, so you really need to convince them how can they marry it into their daily lives and make an integral part of their lives," he explained, sharing that the studio has used Linux servers because it was a "superior operating system to do so." Valve's recently announced Steam OS and Steam Machines are healthy for the console market, Gustavsson said when asked for his opinion on Valve's recent announcements."
Overall, he is right. I bought gaming systems for a single game. For instance, I bought the Wii just to play FireEmblem. I was already interested but it is only on FE's release that I bought it. Once I had it, I played other things as well. But a single exclusive game I was interested in convinced me to buy.
I think that the same thing could happen for Linux. But I am no sure it will ever happen. Will there ever be a Linux exclusive game? If you were a game developper, would you commit to realse your fancy need AAA game ONLY on Linux and not on Windows? That seems like a stupid move unless the company receives a ridiculous amount of money cash for the exclusivity.
I don't think that compatibility with Linux will be sufficient to see an "explosion", it is an exclusivity one need. And being linux exclusive look a lot like betting on a three legged horse.
It needs one killer game that you can't get elsewhere. Do you think Halo would have done what it did for the XBox if it was also available for the PS2?
And since I don't see many game companies jumping the Windows ship to start making AAA Linux exclusives, this guy's "insight" is irrelevant.
ignoring your FUD about Google and Valve, there are good reasons why it's important for Linux to be viable as a desktop environment. The main reason is that the other two main contenders seem to be moving towards a more 'controlled' sort of environment where they get a cut of all software sold and can allow or disallow whatever they want. Apple seems to be moving OSX towards the iOS model, with some iCloud features only available to software sold through their OSX app store. Microsoft, now that they are no longer being monitored closely for anti-competitive behaviour has had the way paved by iOS, and is implementing the same model with 'Metro'. You'll start to see the 'classic' interface an installation model lose support in future versions. That 30% cut looks pretty good to them.
Valve can see what's happening and wants to get ahead of the pack. They want to deploy on an open platform.
I want to be able to install any software I want without having to have it 'approved' by someone, and I'd like to have the option having my software and applications be open source so I can be more sure that various governments are not privy to my personal business. Of course, maybe that's just me. If you don't mind only having computing platforms that are basically walled-garden consoles, you need not worry. I'm sure they will also be available.
"They want to deploy on an open platform" should be "They want to deploy their own platform." Whether it will be "open" or not is very much in question.
Minor point: Valve doesn't want to deploy on an open platform, they just vehemently do *not* want to compete with Microsoft's "marketplace", or cede 30% to them. They want to control the store, just like Apple, Google and Microsoft.