Actually, network and sound are not difficult at all. I've done both...lots! They just tend to not be well understood by the casual coder. It's positional audio that makes it a little more difficult and OpenAL already fills the needs.
You also completely missed the point. I'm not suggesting they create their own directx. I'm saying it's not hard to create a library which does network, memory management (boost or ACE to save lots of time), storage, networking (again, ACE if you like), and audio (OpenAL). Heck, I could create that, by my self, in around 30, 8-hour days. Use OpenGL and you now have a "directx" wanna-be. The only thing I left out was input and that could be done in a fairly short period (a week or two) too.
I am a software engineer. I am fully qualified to make accurate statements on the subject matter. It IS as straight forward as I state. Heck, with only a little more effort, you can make your app 64-bit safe too. The only catch is you have to find programmers that are half way decent, and stay away from "MS"-coders. As a general rule of thumb, MS-only coders have a hard time coding their way out of a wet paper bag. That's obviously not all of them...but.net has seemingly absorbed alot of the VB coders and created a new world of bottom feeders.
Developers are always striving for better development practices
Except, rarely do the developers get to make these decisions. Usually it's made by moron MBAs or ex-Windows coders that got a promotion. And I hate to burst your bubble, but most coders are usually NOT looking for better practices...only a small subset do. Most are content to make their paycheck and go home. Sad but true.
I am a software engineer. It's part to believe, but game programmers make absolute crap. You've also confused things here. It's one thing to "port" it's another to make portable. Learn the difference and then you'll understand my position.
For what it is worth, I read on the NWN2 forums that some users actually got around the SecureROM problems by using drive virtualization software which is SecureROM aware. In fact, some reported that simply having the drivers installed seems to make SecureROM happy; thusly allowing for happily gaming.
Check out the forums and try some searches. You'll probably be able to find the thread and see if that works for you.
Great link. Thanks. But that's not the guy I was thinking of. This guy was somewhere in his 70s to 80s some five years ago or so. His story was much like Al's in that he didn't have a bed, etc.
Actually, it does. People don't realize that game programmers are the low-rung of programmers, pay wise. A programmer might might $50k in a year. That $50k will pay for one coder for a year. Since it won't take a year, we can say, let's put four guys on it for three months. That 50k paid for the port.
Now then, having said that, realistically, it's very doubtful that ONLY 1000 copies would be sold on the basis of a Linux port. It's much more likely to be at least 10,000+. Yes, that's a guessimate on my part...but easily supported as that makes for a tiny percent of the overall Linux desktops these days. As with most polls, the number of people participating in the poll represent a fraction of the over all market. Chances are, because the Linux crowd tends to be more vocal, that 1000 represents a larger precent of the over all market than most polls. Nonetheless, 10,000 games is hardly an unreasonable number for a game which is likely to sale millions in other markets. Especially for a proven franchise. Now, add in the fact that *most* of the development which gives you Linux also gives you Mac. Suddenly, that 10,000 is likely to become something much larger...say something like 50,000 - 100,000 units? Can I prove that? No....but these are hardly far fetched numbers either.
For a title like NWN2, supporting platforms like Mac and Linux, the biggest show stopper is their own stupidity....which is great in this particular case. After all, they already had a very successful title with is built in fan base...which is multiplatform. In fact, the fact that it's multiplatform is one of the reasons it's so popular....and one of the reasons it's still played today. Their own stupidiy already reduced what was to be a gimme audience.
Portability is not a trade off with optimization. If it is, you screwed up in your design, big time. In fact, writing portable code often means means higher quality code with fewer bugs. Fewer bugs means more time to optimize the over all code base. This means a better product over all.
If you're wondering why portable code means a better product, it's simple. Generally speaking, portable code means you're using multiple compilers. Multiple compilers will identify potential bugs and general code problems much more quickly.
Additionally, code which is designed to be portable up front also tends to be designed much better. This is because you have to have a strong low level API on which the rest of your code can sit. Violations of the design by coders is quickly identified once you start to compile on the other platforms as suddenly, it doesn't compile. You can then wrap knuckles as needed. The end is a product which is maintainable, readable, optimal, and well designed. Everyone wins.
If any of these design houses had the slightest bit of a clue, they would already have a portable, low-level API in place which is common to all of their games. This directly translates into faster time to market, fewer bugs, higher quality product, shorter testing cycles, smaller support costs, etc... And as a bonus, they obtain two additional markets (Linux and Mac) for little extra cost; assuming they do something reasonable like OpenGL at the start. Not to mention, this opens the door for the console market as then can continue to add new platform support to their low level API. The only one that becomes problematic is the Xbox because, AFAIK, no OpenGL support.
Let's face it, things like windowing, sound, input, networking, storage, and memory management is generally where the porting issues exist. If you go with OpenGL and a common, reusable library, suddenly the cost becomes moot as it is spread across n-games, as it gets reused. It's not like you have to write n-platforms when the gate opens. Heck, add to the library as you add platforms. Once a platform is in place, the next go-round is a freebe. I have no idea why coding houses are so dumb, but the math is easy to rationalize ad it just makes good business sense. Who doesn't want reduced support costs? Who doesn't want high quality games and happy, loyal customers? Who doesn't want two to three additional markets with greatly reduced effort and shorter time to market?
Let's face it...good client/server games want Linux servers. Supporting networking, storage, and memory is half of the library. Let's face it...this really is a no-brainer but it shows how clueless most coding houses truely are.
Actually, if you were not such an idiot, and if he lived in the US (as the other poster pointed out), charging him under the DCMA would be great because it would help show the abuse this law has created. It would have the potential to create support to repeal that horribly broken law.
But, since you're such a loser, too dumb to realize how the world works, we'll just have to laugh and point at you while the world goes on.
There exists a man that is thought to have NEVER slept in his life time; at least not as an adult. I've seem him on late night TV many moons ago. It seems he served in the navy and he had a standing bet of one paycheck to anyone, if anyone ever caught him sleeping. Supposedly he never had to pay.
If true, this suggests so long as required brain chemistry is properly maintained, sleep is actually not required.
Or...perhaps sleeping women made for easy mating targets which ensured sleep continued to be passed on. Those that required more sleep were more likely to be mated by powling males, resulting in offspring which carry on "sleep" genes.
I'm constantly surprised how often people assume that just because a gene is passed on it implies that there as to be some deep, dark secret. There exists any number of mundane reasons a specific set of genes were passed on....and not all of them are because they allow us to run faster and farther.
Except that it is taking place exactly as you've declared is legal. Customer buys DVDs and iPod. The device has been paid for. The transaction is complete. They are now providing a service to a customer, at the behest of the of the customer after the sale. In other words, they are now a proxy for the customer, acting on a request of the customer. You would have a point if they preloaded and then tried to sell the unit. But that's not what they do...at least not as I understand it.
And what happens if a bug is discovered? Can Transgaming implement the fix all on their own? Of course not.
Actually, ya...they would. If the bug is in the port, absoluetely they would fix it themselves. If the bug is in the game, then the bug affects all games on all platforms and they would need to feed that back to Blizzard as either a bug report or a code fix. Chances are, if the bug was in the game it self and not the port, they would simply submit a bug report, let Blizzard fix it, and merge those changes back into the Linux code.
In other words, the impact is actually quite small. And to boot, using different compilers on code actually goes a long way toward identifying a large class of bugs. In turn, this means a better quality product over all.
Notice it says, "GPS-aided navigation systems directly", which is exactly as I thought it would. Just like commercial jets, they use a combination of inertial navigation with GPS to correct. The longer intertial navigation is used without correction, the higher the error it builds. If you use GPS to augment and periodically correct, you can correct the error which is increased over time. As such, these systems work well without GPS but become increasingly accurate with GPS.
The long of the short, it is the difference between delivering a missile through someone's window, half a world away or delivering a missile within 10-yards of someone's house. For a nuke it doesn't matter. For a small explosive, precision matters.
According to your crazy logic, no one is able to run OpenGL apps on Linux with NVIDIA hardware because the drivers are closed source. If that's not what you mean, then your comment is completely without value. If that is what you mean, then you completely misunderstand. So long as the interface is available and documented (html, text, or simply header files), interfacing to a proprietary driver is not a problem at all. Just like writing OpenGL applications which run on NVIDIA's proprietary graphics drivers are not a problem at all.
Ya, I remember looking at it under OS/2. I liked it...we just didn't have a need for it based on our product line. And I agree...it shamed MS' offering.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, network and sound are not difficult at all. I've done both...lots! They just tend to not be well understood by the casual coder. It's positional audio that makes it a little more difficult and OpenAL already fills the needs.
You also completely missed the point. I'm not suggesting they create their own directx. I'm saying it's not hard to create a library which does network, memory management (boost or ACE to save lots of time), storage, networking (again, ACE if you like), and audio (OpenAL). Heck, I could create that, by my self, in around 30, 8-hour days. Use OpenGL and you now have a "directx" wanna-be. The only thing I left out was input and that could be done in a fairly short period (a week or two) too.
Seriously...this is far, far from rocket science.
I am a software engineer. I am fully qualified to make accurate statements on the subject matter. It IS as straight forward as I state. Heck, with only a little more effort, you can make your app 64-bit safe too. The only catch is you have to find programmers that are half way decent, and stay away from "MS"-coders. As a general rule of thumb, MS-only coders have a hard time coding their way out of a wet paper bag. That's obviously not all of them...but .net has seemingly absorbed alot of the VB coders and created a new world of bottom feeders.
Developers are always striving for better development practices
Except, rarely do the developers get to make these decisions. Usually it's made by moron MBAs or ex-Windows coders that got a promotion. And I hate to burst your bubble, but most coders are usually NOT looking for better practices...only a small subset do. Most are content to make their paycheck and go home. Sad but true.
I am a software engineer. It's part to believe, but game programmers make absolute crap. You've also confused things here. It's one thing to "port" it's another to make portable. Learn the difference and then you'll understand my position.
Learn to count for fuck sake !
Dark Age of Camelot Rating: 8.2
Ryzom Rating: 8.2
Looks like number 5 to me
LOL. Looks like it is tied for number four to me! LOL!
For what it is worth, I read on the NWN2 forums that some users actually got around the SecureROM problems by using drive virtualization software which is SecureROM aware. In fact, some reported that simply having the drivers installed seems to make SecureROM happy; thusly allowing for happily gaming.
Check out the forums and try some searches. You'll probably be able to find the thread and see if that works for you.
Great link. Thanks. But that's not the guy I was thinking of. This guy was somewhere in his 70s to 80s some five years ago or so. His story was much like Al's in that he didn't have a bed, etc.
Actually, it does. People don't realize that game programmers are the low-rung of programmers, pay wise. A programmer might might $50k in a year. That $50k will pay for one coder for a year. Since it won't take a year, we can say, let's put four guys on it for three months. That 50k paid for the port.
Now then, having said that, realistically, it's very doubtful that ONLY 1000 copies would be sold on the basis of a Linux port. It's much more likely to be at least 10,000+. Yes, that's a guessimate on my part...but easily supported as that makes for a tiny percent of the overall Linux desktops these days. As with most polls, the number of people participating in the poll represent a fraction of the over all market. Chances are, because the Linux crowd tends to be more vocal, that 1000 represents a larger precent of the over all market than most polls. Nonetheless, 10,000 games is hardly an unreasonable number for a game which is likely to sale millions in other markets. Especially for a proven franchise. Now, add in the fact that *most* of the development which gives you Linux also gives you Mac. Suddenly, that 10,000 is likely to become something much larger...say something like 50,000 - 100,000 units? Can I prove that? No....but these are hardly far fetched numbers either.
For a title like NWN2, supporting platforms like Mac and Linux, the biggest show stopper is their own stupidity....which is great in this particular case. After all, they already had a very successful title with is built in fan base...which is multiplatform. In fact, the fact that it's multiplatform is one of the reasons it's so popular....and one of the reasons it's still played today. Their own stupidiy already reduced what was to be a gimme audience.
Portability is not a trade off with optimization. If it is, you screwed up in your design, big time. In fact, writing portable code often means means higher quality code with fewer bugs. Fewer bugs means more time to optimize the over all code base. This means a better product over all.
If you're wondering why portable code means a better product, it's simple. Generally speaking, portable code means you're using multiple compilers. Multiple compilers will identify potential bugs and general code problems much more quickly.
Additionally, code which is designed to be portable up front also tends to be designed much better. This is because you have to have a strong low level API on which the rest of your code can sit. Violations of the design by coders is quickly identified once you start to compile on the other platforms as suddenly, it doesn't compile. You can then wrap knuckles as needed. The end is a product which is maintainable, readable, optimal, and well designed. Everyone wins.
If any of these design houses had the slightest bit of a clue, they would already have a portable, low-level API in place which is common to all of their games. This directly translates into faster time to market, fewer bugs, higher quality product, shorter testing cycles, smaller support costs, etc... And as a bonus, they obtain two additional markets (Linux and Mac) for little extra cost; assuming they do something reasonable like OpenGL at the start. Not to mention, this opens the door for the console market as then can continue to add new platform support to their low level API. The only one that becomes problematic is the Xbox because, AFAIK, no OpenGL support.
Let's face it, things like windowing, sound, input, networking, storage, and memory management is generally where the porting issues exist. If you go with OpenGL and a common, reusable library, suddenly the cost becomes moot as it is spread across n-games, as it gets reused. It's not like you have to write n-platforms when the gate opens. Heck, add to the library as you add platforms. Once a platform is in place, the next go-round is a freebe. I have no idea why coding houses are so dumb, but the math is easy to rationalize ad it just makes good business sense. Who doesn't want reduced support costs? Who doesn't want high quality games and happy, loyal customers? Who doesn't want two to three additional markets with greatly reduced effort and shorter time to market?
Let's face it...good client/server games want Linux servers. Supporting networking, storage, and memory is half of the library. Let's face it...this really is a no-brainer but it shows how clueless most coding houses truely are.
Teeheee......hehehehe.....hahaaaaaahahhaa....
Yes...we're all laughing... Perhaps when you get a brain you can join us. Because it is soooo funny. Teeehehee....hehehe....
Actually, if you were not such an idiot, and if he lived in the US (as the other poster pointed out), charging him under the DCMA would be great because it would help show the abuse this law has created. It would have the potential to create support to repeal that horribly broken law.
But, since you're such a loser, too dumb to realize how the world works, we'll just have to laugh and point at you while the world goes on.
There exists a man that is thought to have NEVER slept in his life time; at least not as an adult. I've seem him on late night TV many moons ago. It seems he served in the navy and he had a standing bet of one paycheck to anyone, if anyone ever caught him sleeping. Supposedly he never had to pay.
If true, this suggests so long as required brain chemistry is properly maintained, sleep is actually not required.
Or...perhaps sleeping women made for easy mating targets which ensured sleep continued to be passed on. Those that required more sleep were more likely to be mated by powling males, resulting in offspring which carry on "sleep" genes.
I'm constantly surprised how often people assume that just because a gene is passed on it implies that there as to be some deep, dark secret. There exists any number of mundane reasons a specific set of genes were passed on....and not all of them are because they allow us to run faster and farther.
Seems like he should be charged under the DMCA too.
As someone posted above, only the PIN is encrypted. The card number is available as clear text.
Except that it is taking place exactly as you've declared is legal. Customer buys DVDs and iPod. The device has been paid for. The transaction is complete. They are now providing a service to a customer, at the behest of the of the customer after the sale. In other words, they are now a proxy for the customer, acting on a request of the customer. You would have a point if they preloaded and then tried to sell the unit. But that's not what they do...at least not as I understand it.
Why would you want to go back in time?
So I can get these little pills to my girlfriend!
I think his point was, they are not specifically checking for alternate OSs as a basis cheat detection.
And what happens if a bug is discovered? Can Transgaming implement the fix all on their own? Of course not.
Actually, ya...they would. If the bug is in the port, absoluetely they would fix it themselves. If the bug is in the game, then the bug affects all games on all platforms and they would need to feed that back to Blizzard as either a bug report or a code fix. Chances are, if the bug was in the game it self and not the port, they would simply submit a bug report, let Blizzard fix it, and merge those changes back into the Linux code.
In other words, the impact is actually quite small. And to boot, using different compilers on code actually goes a long way toward identifying a large class of bugs. In turn, this means a better quality product over all.
Notice it says, "GPS-aided navigation systems directly", which is exactly as I thought it would. Just like commercial jets, they use a combination of inertial navigation with GPS to correct. The longer intertial navigation is used without correction, the higher the error it builds. If you use GPS to augment and periodically correct, you can correct the error which is increased over time. As such, these systems work well without GPS but become increasingly accurate with GPS.
The long of the short, it is the difference between delivering a missile through someone's window, half a world away or delivering a missile within 10-yards of someone's house. For a nuke it doesn't matter. For a small explosive, precision matters.
Seems like it would be a whole lot more productive to build systems that augment the signal already available from GPS
My handheld aviation GPS supports such a concept. It is called Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS). Where I fly I get good WAAS coverage so I'm happy.
Vista won't be out for home users before the big day
Sounds like it will be a good Christmas after all!
According to your crazy logic, no one is able to run OpenGL apps on Linux with NVIDIA hardware because the drivers are closed source. If that's not what you mean, then your comment is completely without value. If that is what you mean, then you completely misunderstand. So long as the interface is available and documented (html, text, or simply header files), interfacing to a proprietary driver is not a problem at all. Just like writing OpenGL applications which run on NVIDIA's proprietary graphics drivers are not a problem at all.
Great link. Make for interesting reading. Since the link is no longer available it makes me wonder if it is even real.
Hey! My wife's name is Laura! That bitch!
Ya, I remember looking at it under OS/2. I liked it...we just didn't have a need for it based on our product line. And I agree...it shamed MS' offering.