Slashdot Mirror
Carmack on the retail Quake3 for linux
Fritti writes "Carmack's new .plan talks about the retail version of Quake3Arena (besides announcing a Mac version of the demo); he asks Linux/Mac users to make a statement toward the distributors and resellers, and to wait for the appropriate boxed version before buying. "If everyone bought a windows version and the other boxes sold like crap in comparison, that would be plenty of evidence for most executives to can any cross platform development.". "
This is in response to many people who ask why not a hybrid cd, or quick downloads... Read the plan..carefully. Carmack would like to do a hybrid CD version. He chose not to. This is clearly not because he wants to screw the Linux/Mac crowd. A big part of this whole set-up id is using is to convince the DISTRIBUTORS and RETAILERS (CompUSA, etc) that Linux/Mac versions will sell. Id is going to support these platforms in the future no matter what. If they offered Linux/Mac versions on the same CD or as downloadable binaries, all the distributors/retailers would see is "Ok, 900,000 sales of the game that contain the Windows version". They (the distributors/retailers) don't care how many people download the Linux/Mac executable, no matter how many logs id presents them with, because it has nothing to do with them. They deal only in the physical goods of the box. While you may be slightly inconvienced due to the Windows version coming out before the Linux version, in the long term this release, if Linux/Mac users have the patience to wait for the right version, will be the first step towards changing the attitudes of these distributors/retailers. Dont blame id, they are going to release the game near simultanously for all markets, they just realize that currently the distributors will give preference to the Windows version. Why is half of Slashdot so negative? Lashing out at id is exactly the wrong response. This has the potential to be a GREAT thing. Uh that's all.
I think so. I believe the point that Carmack is trying to make is to send a message to retailers about the Linux market.
Most software houses don't sell their works straight to the public. Instead, they publish them and then sell to the retailers (e.g., CompUSA). If the retailers don't demand Linux-based games, then the publishers don't sell any. Thus, they won't bother writing any Linux games.
Take a look at two suggestions I've seen:
Sell just a PC version, but let the user download the binary for his OS.
This logic is severely flawed. Ok, so id knows how many Linux/Mac clients exist. Whee. They then publish their server logs. Whee. Other software companies check out id's page and sees some statistics. How do they know that id did not make up those numbers? In other words, other companies can not verify, for themselves, the Linux market.
Distribute a hybrid CD. For the registration card, allow the user to choose his OS.
This is flawed like above. Again, id could publish the values; yet the numbers can not be emperically verified.
Suppose that id continues as plans. Linux users buy Linux versions of Q3; Mac and PC users do likewise. Now, each retailer can verify for themselves the demand for the different OSs. Knowing those values, they can then demand to the software houses what operating systems they (the publishers) should support.
If the demand for Linux is non-existant, then the retailers won't buy any Linux games from the publishers. Even if the publishers want to support Linux, they might choose to not do so if nobody is going to buy Linux.
But if Q3, Linux version sells extremely well, the retailers are sure to notice. They then pass on this demand to the publishers.
There seems to be a lot of talk here about the fact that Q3A may (or may not)be a rehashed version of Wolfenstein, Doom, etc. etc
What I don't see mentioned is one of the main reasons why I'll gladly shell my bucks over to Id: they put out quality product, period.
95% of gaming companies don't do this -- they either *can't* do it because they don't have the coding talen or they *won't* do it because the corporate suits insist that they release their product prematurely.
I mean, I'm not an advocate of gaming magazines -- they seem to be glorified hype-machines with dippy writers -- but they are a good thermometer of the gaming culture. Maybe not the "hardcore" culture -- but I think they give a pretty good idea of what Joe Consumer buys when he/she steps into a Best Buy and wants the latest "game".
Now, take a look at the games they "review" at any given time: 85% of the reviews in any given are way, way below the "satisfactory" level. Companies out there are just shovelling the stuff out -- to make money, yes -- but also to cash in on the latest hot license. I mean, stop and think: does anyone think for a minute that there's a *high* probability that the Matrix license will lead to a quality game? It'll probably lead to a so-so game, a mediocore review, and then will be forgotten in two months time.
Id, on other hand, consistently scores pretty well with these gaming magazines and writers. (And, in a tangent rant, you always get the jackoff writers writing dumb editorials: "Hmm. I don't really know what to write in my editorial, so I'll write an editorial about not knowing what to write about in an editorial." Or: "Well, folks, it's been a good XX years, but I've got to move on. I've seen X, and I've seen Y, and well, I can't think of anything else to say, so I'll just write this column about writing a column about saying goodbye to writing columns.")
And, sure, these writers usually say much of what is being said here: that Quake X is a rehash, another Doom, a prettier Wolfenstein. Still, they usually admit (rightly, I think) that, well, Id pretty much sets the standard for graphics and gameplay that many, many other companies follow.
Not to mention they oftentimes set the standard for hardware purchasing, too. I mean, I go by the Id rule: I upgrade whenever a new Quake is out because, well, that's the time to upgrade. I know that if I want pretty eye-candy in Quake, I'll probably get a new graphics card and a new CPU (and maybe a new mobo).
Although Id has problems. The initial releases of Quake 2, for example, were a mess. But they're pretty good about keeping in touch with the community and fixing the problems. I can't say the same for other developers. (Some developers, yes: the Unreal folks, the Half-Life, folks, etc.)
But I just get the sense that Carmack and Co. -- while they of course have to deal with the suits and with their profit margins -- are more likely to put out a quality piece of work than not.
It's not a crap shoot with Id. You know you'll get some a topnothc product. There's no doubt about that. You may not like the gameplay -- or you may find it derivitive, whatever -- but gameplay theory issues aside, the product itself is always kickass.
I mean, hell, Delta Force 2 is a lot like Delta Force. SpecOPS II is a *lot* like SpecOPS I. And with those two products, I don't see the sort of technological leaps you see in Id's products.
They always put out some wildass wicked shit.