What happened to...

[grofaz]

...Loki Games ?? Why did they go belly up ??

[slux]

Very poor management and a small market for Linux games. They went right after AAA games with very costly licensing deals and used their venture capitalist -provided funds for that, then didn't manage to sell many copies at all. Loki was a true dotcom.

The story goes that Draeker ordered 50000 copies of the Q3:Arena tinbox but the sales were a complete flop, both because people bought the normal box and downloaded the Linux installer and because there simply weren't that many GNU/Linux-using gamers. You might still today find some of those tinboxes in the shops, now labeled with a sticker that tells how to install in Windows.

Today we have Linux Game Publishing who may not be offering you Half Life 2 or even any really *new* games but they try to seek out quality titles that won't cost an arm and a leg for them to port and are sure to stay in the business for a long time to come. I hope it'll become feasible to get some really big titles on Linux even without the developer doing it voluntary in the future but dual booting & Cedega aren't helping and people need to buy what's currently available for the market to grow.

[rafakl]

Cenega and Id are showing the way of what the game publishers must do!!!

Why bother creating a costly businesses like Loky games when the publishers can create a "path" to play they games in Linux??? or they can work with Cenega to get the support for the windows plataform???

Linux is still a very small market for games, and its very costly creating a superb game only for linux.... so the Cenega and Id way are the best

[grofaz]

Hmm...interesting.

[slux]

Cedega is a second-rate solution and not really a sustainable one, there's just no way around it. Companies like Valve or Blizzard have zero interest in supporting Linux and as long as users are willing to accept something like Cedega, why should they? Someone else is doing the work for them and they can just keep churning out releases for Windows.

Running a game slowly and with no guarantee the next patch won't completely break it is certainly not comparable to a native experience.

As for id software and Epic games, they don't do their GNU/Linux releases because it makes business sense but because Carmack and others have a personal interest in seeing Linux succeed. We can always hope that more developers at more companies get into Linux and start to feel the same way but I don't feel very optimistic about that venue, you only need to look at where Mac is today to see that most of their games are still done by companies similar to LGP. That and in the 6-7 years I've been playing on GNU/Linux nothing has really changed. Epic & id are still doing their ports just like they did back then, BioWare did play around with the idea but seems to have given up after NWN.

The market is indeed small and LGP can't possibly gather to hardcore gamers but if you're just a casual gamer you should look past release dates and realize that even a little older games are still fun if you've never seen them before.

I understand LGP sales numbers aren't very pretty to look at currently. If you feel Linux will be your desktop OS in the future, do yourself a favor the next time, leave that Warcraft 3 box in the store and check out something like Majesty instead.

[arcanistherogue]

Wow, this topic is an interesting read.

[rafakl]

The first reason that there are so much games for Windows plataforms is profit, but thanks to people like carmack more more and more publishers will be launching linux versions of their games (i hope...).

[skoal]

Why bother creating a costly businesses like Loky games when the publishers can create a "path" to play they games in Linux??? or they can work with Cenega to get the support for the windows plataform???
Well, history may provide some insight here. The "lead" developer at Loki games, Ryan Gordon (aka Icculus), brought us many fine titles like Quake3 and Descent3 (just to name a few). I own (have purchased) at least 5 of their Loki games, boxes and all. Those are native ports! Not cedega emulation. Most startup businesses fail, albeit in software or otherwise. We can thank Loki for exporting (and showing) the Linux _interest_ in games to the other Publishers/Developers. Id software anyone? Loki installer anyone? Loki this anyone? Loki that anyone? Before loki, we just had GnomeStones...

A lot of businesses succeed from others failures, so in time, we may very well have that luxury yet again. All thanks to such great pioneers like Loki, not Transgaming...

\\//_

[rafakl]

I support your opinon skoal, i think too that history provide some insight.

But i still think that is cheaper and easier for the developers/publishers and for the users that the developers make they own linux versions, and pack in the same PC CD, or download it like Doom 3 for example, and not "outsource" it to an another company.

Its posible to do so, but i cant think right now how can be a good business model...

[seethru]

I support your opinon skoal, i think too that history provide some insight.

But i still think that is cheaper and easier for the developers/publishers and for the users that the developers make they own linux versions, and pack in the same PC CD, or download it like Doom 3 for example, and not "outsource" it to an another company.

Its posible to do so, but i cant think right now how can be a good business model...
I'm hoping that software developers start hiring a small team to do just this, work on linux support for their titles. Porting the code, and making sure it works flawlessly. The problem w/ a lot of games these days, is their support for directx, and only directx. The reason Blizzards games work so well in Linux w/ Cedega? They also support opengl. More developers need to support both, that will be a step in the right direction.

While I love linux, I'm one of many who dual boot, not because my games don't run in *nix (I really only play WoW) but because I'm actually going through school to become a game developer. When I'm done school, you can be sure that wherever I end up working, I'm gonna be pushing for native Linux support INCLUDED on all PC CD's.

[skoal]

Its posible to do so, but i cant think right now how can be a good business model...
Yes, sir. That's a good question. Maybe transgaming could spill some of it's revenue and development into actual native port implementations. So, it would be a natural migration to the ideal Loki model.

I think others here have pointed out Carmack as some great champion for Linux games. Well, maybe in part. However, I think it has more to do with his own interest in driving OpenGL for his game _engines_. It fits his traditional development model, and of course, openGL just happens to be far easier to port than DirectX. I don't thank John for that. I thank Loki. As far back as I can remember, even Id software was oblivious to linux until Loki came around.

\\//_

[rafakl]

Is true that Micrsoft wants to make Windows Vista DirecX only?? and kick out OpenGL support??

[Mishura]

Not necessarily. Microsoft is going to implement some kind of OpenGL emulator using DirectX (Like Cedega emulates Direct3D through OpenGL) as default.. but as soon as you install your ATi or Nvidia drivers, you *should* get full OpenGL acceleration w/o the DX layer.

Well, so I hope. If not then its going to be sad times ahead. I hear consoles are getting better.....

[seethru]

Is true that Micrsoft wants to make Windows Vista DirecX only?? and kick out OpenGL support??
wow, if thats true it'll be one more reason to not use Windows, hell that should put them right back in court for trying to eliminate competition.

[arcanistherogue]

[QUOTE=skoalAs far back as I can remember, even Id software was oblivious to linux until Loki came around.[/QUOTE]

Actually, I read a biography about John Romero and Carmack, and in it it said Carmack let a small team do a port of the Doom games to Linux. And he also referred to using Linux for programming, but I'm not sure if he ment that he used Linux or that it was easy to program on Linux. I'll try to quote the sentences when my hand heals and I don't have to hunt and peck >_<....

[skoal]

Actually, I read a biography about John Romero and Carmack, and in it it said Carmack let a small team do a port of the Doom games to Linux.
Wow! See there. Now that's history. I didn't know that. I know Carmack and gang typically release their source code several years afterwards, and I thought those ports (like DOSDoom first, and then others like it) to other platforms (like linux) were only after their source release. I guess I only remember native ports of (fairly) current titles beginning with Loki.

Shoot, I plopped down ~$30 for the boxes of Terminus and Savage a while back. I hope those 2 companies don't share the same misfortune as Loki. I'd like to think as more people try out Linux and petition Game publishers, more Loki like companies will arise. However, Window ports to Apple never really took fire, so I won't hold my breath...

\\//_

[seethru]

Wow! See there. Now that's history. I didn't know that. I know Carmack and gang typically release their source code several years afterwards, and I thought those ports (like DOSDoom first, and then others like it) to other platforms (like linux) were only after their source release. I guess I only remember native ports of (fairly) current titles beginning with Loki.

Shoot, I plopped down ~$30 for the boxes of Terminus and Savage a while back. I hope those 2 companies don't share the same misfortune as Loki. I'd like to think as more people try out Linux and petition Game publishers, more Loki like companies will arise. However, Window ports to Apple never really took fire, so I won't hold my breath...

\\//_
wasn't there a recent petition to Blizzard to port WoW to linux? Thats something I'd pay for, as it's my only real gaming addiction atm.

[skoal]

I don't know about Blizzard and WoW. I'm more of a "space ace" or a "slash and hack" FPS'er. If that's the case, find me the petition link to Blizzard and I'll sign it. The more the merrier...

I know tux games (http://www.tuxgames.com/) provides us ways to purchase Linux titles of popular software through them, which supposedly encourages more ports to Linux. However, when they want $10-15 more than what I can buy off the shelf, they ain't encouraging _me_ any...

\\//_

[seethru]

I don't know about Blizzard and WoW. I'm more of a "space ace" or a "slash and hack" FPS'er. If that's the case, find me the petition link to Blizzard and I'll sign it. The more the merrier...

I know tux games (http://www.tuxgames.com/) provides us ways to purchase Linux titles of popular software through them, which supposedly encourages more ports to Linux. However, when they want $10-15 more than what I can buy off the shelf, they ain't encouraging _me_ any...

\\//_

did some searching and found it, here (http://www.blizzpub.net/petition/). They're looking for 20,000 signatures before they send it, and they're just under 2000 shy. Spread it around and get those final 2k. Perhaps the money Blizzard makes off of a native client/linux subscribers other companies will realize there is a market for it.

[rafakl]

When all the publishers see that there is money under linux gaming, they will start making linux ports, otherwise....

[skoal]

did some searching and found it, here (http://www.blizzpub.net/petition/). They're looking for 20,000 signatures before they send it, and they're just under 2000 shy. Spread it around and get those final 2k.
Thanks. Will do. I'm on it like a fly on stink...

\\//_

[npaladin2000]

Didn't I hear that Strategy First opened the source on a couple of their games? I thought I heard somewhere that someone was working on porting Jagged Alliance 2 to Linux (I think I'm gonna start saying Lin32 and see how fast Microsoft sues me..bwa ha ha).

[slux]

Wow! See there. Now that's history. I didn't know that. I know Carmack and gang typically release their source code several years afterwards, and I thought those ports (like DOSDoom first, and then others like it) to other platforms (like linux) were only after their source release. I guess I only remember native ports of (fairly) current titles beginning with Loki.
\\//_

Actually the original Doom source code release was a Linux version of doom which caused DOSDoom's name and the creation of the term "source port" which has stuck even though "source ports" very seldom involve any sort of porting these days.

BTW, check out Q3's Carmack player model. He's wearing this GNU T-shirt (http://www.gnu.org/order/t-shirts.html#TOC1998) :P


did some searching and found it, here. They're looking for 20,000 signatures before they send it, and they're just under 2000 shy. Spread it around and get those final 2k. Perhaps the money Blizzard makes off of a native client/linux subscribers other companies will realize there is a market for it.

Petitions have never achieved anything as far as I'm aware of and while I believe they're still worth signing if there's even a small theoretical possibility, I would definitely not bet on it in the case of Blizzard. The story goes that Blizzard had a ready to play Linux port of WOW in their hands (some have said it was part of the beta) but they decided to ditch it even though LGP was in talks with them and offered to support the game for them at their own cost. Blizzard's certainly a company with something against Linux. I'm eagerly waiting to see the slashdot interview of the WOW team...


Didn't I hear that Strategy First opened the source on a couple of their games? I thought I heard somewhere that someone was working on porting Jagged Alliance 2 to Linux (I think I'm gonna start saying Lin32 and see how fast Microsoft sues me..bwa ha ha).

Yeah, JA2 source is available, it came with JA2: Wildfire although with a bit restrictive license I believe. No-one has ported it yet as far as I know as it proved a bit difficult and most interest centered on modding the game. Some other games have had their source released as well, Homeworld already has a basic port and so does Freespace 2. OTOH, Mig Alley is another unported one. Check out Liberated Games (http://wwww.liberatedgames.com/) for more. They cover other kinds of releases as well so it's a bit difficult to find the source releases among the other kinds of releases though.

[endy]

Wow, I never new JC's model was sporting a GNU T-Shirt. For others like me who missed this until now, behold...

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/8452/carmackgnu9io.th.png (http://img151.imageshack.us/my.php?image=carmackgnu9io.png)

[rafakl]

What can have a company against Linux ???

I think is because of the idea that everithing in linux is "free", and many people (including high executives of important companies) wrongly think that.

[skoal]

BTW, check out Q3's Carmack player model. He's wearing this GNU T-shirt (http://www.gnu.org/order/t-shirts.html#TOC1998) :P
haha. Priceless! I think the best part of playing Quake II was going to that back room after you defeat the final boss, and all those pictures of Id developers are there, with some bio's, some player models, and one dude sitting in a chair. I forgot who was in that chair. I hope Id throws in some easter bunnies like that in Q4, assuming it will even have single player storyline.

Petitions probably don't have a promising track record yet, since it's only recently that linux users (in masse) have done so. Just imagine meeting that goal, and Blizzard (of all publishers) makes that port. Now, imagine what that would mean for _other_ game publishers considering future (or current) linux ports. Shockwaves, baby! Ripple 'em into submission...

\\//_

[shakin]

What can have a company against Linux ???

Blizzard doesn't have anything against Linux, but they have a lot riding on Windows. Microsoft pushed them hard to not release the Linux client. For MS, games are a huge tipping point. Once gamers can switch to Linux there will be a massive number of youth using it and they'll likely to continue using Linux into their adulthood. It's the 10-15 year migration to Linux that has MS worried. Get 'em while they're young!

So, MS told Blizzard that they won't get any support from MS if they release the Linux client. This includes talking directly to MS programmers about various APIs and getting bugs fixed in MS products. MS also hinted that without this support, MS couldn't guarantee that a Windows update wouldn't prevent WoW from running. This hint, of course, is actually a threat.

MS is still using the same business practices that got it convicted for anti-competitive behaviour, just on a smaller scale now. Blizzard won't try to get the feds after MS because they're so reliant on selling Windows software. It's easier to just not release the Linux client.

[Gnobody]

Blizzard doesn't have anything against Linux, but they have a lot riding on Windows. Microsoft pushed them hard to not release the Linux client. For MS, games are a huge tipping point. Once gamers can switch to Linux there will be a massive number of youth using it and they'll likely to continue using Linux into their adulthood. It's the 10-15 year migration to Linux that has MS worried. Get 'em while they're young!

So, MS told Blizzard that they won't get any support from MS if they release the Linux client. This includes talking directly to MS programmers about various APIs and getting bugs fixed in MS products. MS also hinted that without this support, MS couldn't guarantee that a Windows update wouldn't prevent WoW from running. This hint, of course, is actually a threat.

MS is still using the same business practices that got it convicted for anti-competitive behaviour, just on a smaller scale now. Blizzard won't try to get the feds after MS because they're so reliant on selling Windows software. It's easier to just not release the Linux client.
Shakin is that speculation? Or do you have some affiliation to Blizzard. I wouldn't doubt that M$ would do that, but have they really?

[shakin]

Shakin is that speculation? Or do you have some affiliation to Blizzard. I wouldn't doubt that M$ would do that, but have they really?

I know two people from different companies who have said this is what MS did to them. One works QA for a company that only really has one big title, but it's very popular and has many sequels, and the other works for a company that puts out dozens of games per year. They had created a Linux version of one of their games and I actually saw it running on Fedora Core in beta.

[skoal]

So, MS told Blizzard that they won't get any support from MS if they release the Linux client. This includes talking directly to MS programmers about various APIs and getting bugs fixed in MS products. MS also hinted that without this support, MS couldn't guarantee that a Windows update wouldn't prevent WoW from running. This hint, of course, is actually a threat.
Quite frankly, I find this hard to believe. For one, Blizzard gets their revenue from _us_, not Microsoft. Secondly, the directx API or whatever is pretty accessible (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=136A7B29-AA12-4C3B-AA7D-15CD98A9A59C&displaylang=en), and even I could develop with their SDK if I were a glutton for punishment. What support would Blizzard need from Microsoft which they couldn't already get from their pool of talented developers? Unless Microsoft actually writes Blizzard games for Blizzard, I just don't see your conspiracy here.

No company responds well to threats, even from the Microsoft juggernaut. I don't think your inside source has the same credentials as "deep throat" (http://www.nixon.archives.gov/news/deepthroat.html) (I provided a link to avoid any embarassing googling for those who don't understand that reference)...

\\//_

[seethru]

Blizzard doesn't have anything against Linux, but they have a lot riding on Windows. Microsoft pushed them hard to not release the Linux client. For MS, games are a huge tipping point. Once gamers can switch to Linux there will be a massive number of youth using it and they'll likely to continue using Linux into their adulthood. It's the 10-15 year migration to Linux that has MS worried. Get 'em while they're young!

So, MS told Blizzard that they won't get any support from MS if they release the Linux client. This includes talking directly to MS programmers about various APIs and getting bugs fixed in MS products. MS also hinted that without this support, MS couldn't guarantee that a Windows update wouldn't prevent WoW from running. This hint, of course, is actually a threat.

MS is still using the same business practices that got it convicted for anti-competitive behaviour, just on a smaller scale now. Blizzard won't try to get the feds after MS because they're so reliant on selling Windows software. It's easier to just not release the Linux client.

I hope none of that is true, but it just wouldn't surprise me. If that is true, something needs to be done.

[rafakl]

That MS actions are anti-free market, because they are pushing game creators to stop and desist making new products for the consumers. Its like if they put a gun on your head to buy only Win products.

Thats anti free market, anti capitalism... thats communism, really.
[-X

[shakin]

Quite frankly, I find this hard to believe. For one, Blizzard gets their revenue from _us_, not Microsoft. Secondly, the directx API or whatever is pretty accessible (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=136A7B29-AA12-4C3B-AA7D-15CD98A9A59C&displaylang=en), and even I could develop with their SDK if I were a glutton for punishment. What support would Blizzard need from Microsoft which they couldn't already get from their pool of talented developers? Unless Microsoft actually writes Blizzard games for Blizzard, I just don't see your conspiracy here.

No company responds well to threats, even from the Microsoft juggernaut. I don't think your inside source has the same credentials as "deep throat" (http://www.nixon.archives.gov/news/deepthroat.html) (I provided a link to avoid any embarassing googling for those who don't understand that reference)...

\\//_

Blizzard and many other big game companies enjoy a priviledged relationship with MS. Hardware manufacturers do as well. DirectX features are often added directly from feedback from ATI , Valve, Blizzard and other big game companies. These big companies command enough respect from MS that MS will fix bugs in their software very rapidly to ensure that these games make it to market as fast as possible. When you see releases such as DirectX9c it is often bugfixes like this that make the last letter on the end. Smaller companies can report bugs, but if they're the only ones MS knows is suffering from that bug then it's not going to get fixed quickly and that company might have to sit on their game for a while until it gets fixed or they may have to rewrite parts of their game and delay the release.

Another benefit is service pack prereleases. XP SP2 was a biggie and these priviledged companies were able to test and fix their game well ahead of SP2's release date. Other companies had a much shorter amount of testing time and weren't able to file minor SP2 bug reports.

Basically, Blizzard does not want to lose their honored place among MS game developers.

[skoal]

DirectX features are often added directly from feedback from ATI , Valve, Blizzard and other big game companies.
That's a good point and observation. I would imagine as a game developer, I would be in direct contact with ATI or NVIDIA first, and Microsoft would be outside my office with hat in hand. "Use me! Use me! DirectX perty please!" I know from following Doom3 development, Carmack (and Id software) worked intimately with Nvidia throughout the process. The gaming industry is a beast unto itself, and I agree Microsoft does have some influence in it as you say. It would be interesting to know to what extent.

If you run across some OpenGL vs. DirectX articles and how they influence all these players in the gaming industry, shoot me a 'pm' or post back here. That would be a good read...

\\//_