PDA

View Full Version : Is it practically possible to make Linux compatible to all PC games?



icett
August 21st, 2007, 05:34 PM
PC Gaming! I think this is the only last great hurdle for Linux to become a universal operating system in competition to Windows. I am a regular gamer myself and whereever I go I see every game suitable for the Windows platform only. All Linux developers should seriously get together to cross this last big hurdle and make Linux compatible for all PC games. This will create a big change in the attitude of PC users towards Linux and I am confident that a majority would begin to use Linux alongside Windows. But the question comes; Is it really possible to make Linux compatible for PC games in practical terms? And how? What is your opinion?:)

Henry Rayker
August 21st, 2007, 05:38 PM
Given the current status, no. There are a lot more "great hurdles" than just games. One MAJOR issue, in my opinion, is just hardware support. Because of the fact that we don't have industry support (and hence decent drivers for so many devices), (or a unified sound platform, for that matter) we are basically screwed for the time being.

Get all of the hardware stuff sorted out, THEN worry with trivialities like games.

igknighted
August 21st, 2007, 05:48 PM
1) It is not practical

2) It is not desirable

3) It is not needed

Now to elaborate:

1) DX9 has been out a LONG time, and we are still struggling with many games. Many other parts of the WinXP API are still beyond what Wine can do. And Microsoft has already moved on to Vista. So now we are more behind. You can never win playing catch-up like this. Basically, we can never match windows performance for windows games.

2) The more we support windows games, the less likely game manufacturers are to make linux games. Think about it. If everyone went out this fall and bought the linux-compatible UT2007 instead of whatever hot new game comes out from windows-only shops, there would be a significant boost to the economic arguement behind making multi-platform games. Between the Mac community and the Linux community, we could make a difference this year.

3) Most importantly, the gaming crowd is tiny. Compared to the entire body of computer users at least. So if gamers don't want to use Linux, that doesn't really bother me too much. As for casual gamers, there are plenty of good OSS games that they can switch to. Especially in this day and age where PC gaming is getting left behind in favor of console gaming, the vast majority of people do not need fancy 3d computer games. They have a console for when they are going to game and they have solitaire and mahhjong tiles on their computer to distract them from writing papers ;).

There are certain benefits to having the gaming crowd, of course. Most notably gamers crave the latest hardware and need 3d video drivers that work well. If there was a noticable shift to linux from this crowd, we might get better device drivers, and sooner. But in reality we can get these things without trying to woo the gamer crowd, which I think is a fairly futile effort right now with how little we have to offer them.

Sidenote, OpenGL 3.0 is way better than DX10 anyways, so hopefully manufacturers make games using OpenGL 3 instead of DX10, which would make ports way easier.

LaRoza
August 21st, 2007, 05:52 PM
The title of the thread is wrong, games have to be compatible with Linux, not the other way around, noone writes an OS to be compatible with applications, but with harddware.

tehkain
August 21st, 2007, 06:03 PM
The Free Software Operating system we are using is very much capable of playing games. OpenGL is by far the market leader - the only place it does not thrive is the MS gaming world - which is actually fairly small. See Xbox360 and some PC games(still the minority on the PC).

We look at the wii and the ps3(and most handhelds) - what do we see? OpenGl. Now with opengl3.0 we put DX10 and all the MS kits to shame. So Linux and free software is ready for gaming. Now the question becomes - Are Hardware and software vendors ready to provide linux support? This is a hard question because the answer is - Some are, alot are not.

The effort needed to post many games from windows or a console to linux is trivial with the source code if they use OpenGl or a layer that allows both OpenGL and DX. This is why UT is yet again coming to linux - they write once and deploy everwhere. The PS3, Mac, and Linux versions are the same beast at heart and it probably required less people to distribute for versions for these system then it took to cater the meetings for the windows/xbox team.

notwen
August 21st, 2007, 06:04 PM
Is it practically possible to make Linux compatible to all PC games?

If you are referring to the games as of late, the ones w/ "Games for Windows" plastered across the top then no, we are way too far behind for that to become a reality anytime soon. What you can hope for is that move game developers will begin releasing native version fo their games for Linux. id software and epic games are currently both very vocal about showing support for Linux w/ their future releases. I dual-boot for the few PC games I still play, but have just about made my mind up to fork out for a console to get my occasional gaming fix. =]

happysmileman
August 21st, 2007, 06:13 PM
It may be "possible" if the Linux developers try to copy every aspect of Windows exactly, right down to the last flaw and security issue.

Fortunately, this isn't the goal of Linux, the developers make an OS that is more stable, and in most cases faster than Windows.

If you want games to come to Linux it's up to the games developers, don't claim this is a Linux problem (though it does slow down adaption a lot).

If youd like to see this happen show your support by getting some of the few games that ARE available for Linux, and voice your support for them. (Oh and make sure you get the games from a good outlet, preferably from the game developers themselves if possible, that way they can see that you're using Linux for games and see that it may be profitable to release more games for it)

icett
August 21st, 2007, 06:13 PM
I assume your answer to be a yes. It is possible to make Linux compatible to PC games provided the industry supports Linux for hardware and PC games companies make games for Linux platform too. But for this to to happen Linux should move a little to the commercial option. There should arise a major Linux distribution on a semi commercial basis to compete head on with Windows in all spheres offering the OS on a very fair price. Without the commercial basis, no one would take them seriously. And for that there should be a financially sound company which is able to compete with Microsoft. I guess it could be Google and we may see a Google Linux OS sometime soon. Linux must move from absolute socialism like that of the former Soviet Union to a more liberal and practicable one like in some European countries where welfare state is still very successful! Lets see what happens.:)

igknighted
August 21st, 2007, 06:25 PM
I assume your answer to be a yes. It is possible to make Linux compatible to PC games provided the industry supports Linux for hardware and PC games companies make games for Linux platform too. But for this to to happen Linux should move a little to the commercial option. There should arise a major Linux distribution on a semi commercial basis to compete head on with Windows in all spheres offering the OS on a very fair price. Without the commercial basis, no one would take them seriously. And for that there should be a financially sound company which is able to compete with Microsoft. I guess it could be Google and we may see a Google Linux OS sometime soon. Linux must move from absolute socialism like that of the former Soviet Union to a more liberal and practicable one like in some European countries where welfare state is still very successful! Lets see what happens.:)

I took this thread seriously until this post...

Look, Linux COULD go commercial and beat windows left and right. But why? What would we have left? Where is the benefit of that to linux users who would then have to pay for a distro and not have the freedom to do what they want with it, or else get crapped on by another commercial OS?

Linux is great because of its philosophy. That might not make it popular or mainstream, but that is OK. It is good enough that anyone CAN use it, and that is the goal. Now whether they choose that freedom is important and they want to make the leap... that is up to them. Ubuntu's goal is to make linux AVAILABLE and USABLE by all. NOT to put linux on every computer.

icett
August 21st, 2007, 06:46 PM
I took this thread seriously until this post...

Look, Linux COULD go commercial and beat windows left and right. But why? What would we have left? Where is the benefit of that to linux users who would then have to pay for a distro and not have the freedom to do what they want with it, or else get crapped on by another commercial OS?

Linux is great because of its philosophy. That might not make it popular or mainstream, but that is OK. It is good enough that anyone CAN use it, and that is the goal. Now whether they choose that freedom is important and they want to make the leap... that is up to them. Ubuntu's goal is to make linux AVAILABLE and USABLE by all. NOT to put linux on every computer.





I like Linux and I am sure you like it too. Until sometime back I didn't know that there is some other operating system out there other than Windows. I only knew Windows and had no concept of an Operating syetem in my mind. The reason was that Linux is not that popular. I was very delighted to know about Linux when I heard about it from a friend of mine. Inspite of the fact that its more stable than Windows and has many othere advantages over Windows few people know anything than Windows. Now that I love Linux like other Linux community I think that like me all wish Linux to be a popular and universal OS and many wish it competes with Windows head on and at least be as popular as Windows. For that if some major distro move to semi commercial i.e. to find a middle way where the OS is very cheap, fair priced, and free for skilled contributors and even those aspiring to contribute for it. A lenient policy could be adopted by the distro even keeping the freedom option for contributing people. Wouldn't that be good.:)

mips
August 21st, 2007, 07:17 PM
If most game vendors just chose to use OpenGL and the Open sound formats etc we would be further down the road.

the_darkside_986
August 21st, 2007, 07:51 PM
I believe the PS3 and Wii have their own OS-specific rendering libraries. For example, the PSP has the pspgu, which is similar to openGL but very different in many ways.

The only way these problems will be solved is when users decide to purchase only linux-compatible hardware and games. I have decided that I will never bother purchasing another Windows game ever, mostly because of the price and disappointment factor, and out of principle. I don't know if I really care about proprietary game software much anymore. I'll be playing something on Windows and there are minor (sometimes major) annoyances in the game that make me wish I had the source code so I could fix it or customize it the way I want.

If I ever decide to build my own PC, then I will try my best to find hardware whose drivers will be 100% open source. I'll have to try to order graphics cards whose 3d drivers are open source (I know ATI and Nvidia doesn't have anything like that) and even an open-source wireless card if that ever exists.

About non-free Linux: there are already proprietary Linux distributions such as Novell's Suse Enterprise Desktop, and Linspire. Novell's enterprise OS might be good for businesses or whatever, but the whole point of using GNU/Linux is to avoid closed-source software such as Windows. Software freedom does not equal a totalitarian society like Soviet Union but quite the opposite. MS software reminds me more of Soviet Union.

koenn
August 21st, 2007, 08:35 PM
I assume your answer to be a yes. It is possible to make Linux compatible to PC games ...
But for this to to happen Linux should move a little to the commercial option. ... Linux must move from absolute socialism like that of the former Soviet Union to a more liberal and practicable one like in some European countries where welfare state is still very successful!
the answer is no. It is NOT practically possible to make Linux compatible to all PC games. As pointed out before (eg post #4 , a.o.), games, like all applications, should be made to be compatible with the operating system they have to run on, not the other way around. What you are saying is something like "make oceans compatible with cars, because me and my car-loving friends don't like to travel by ship".

Your analogy to USSR communism is therefore useless, because it starts from the assumption that modifying Linux to support Windows games is practically possible. It is also just wrong by itself, because it suggests Linux made a deleberate, political choice not to support Windows games.
As for the "need to get commercial" - there are commercial distro's, there are distro's backed by big money (Ubuntu ?), there are distro's you have to buy rather than download, ... what's your point ? If "commercial" would be the magic that make your Windows-games-ojn-Linux happen, you'd have to be seeing them by now

As pointed out by a couple of people in this thread, Linux provides the necessary infrastructure for games (eg OpenGL). So it's really up to the game developers to develop Linux-compatible games. End of story.

Besides that, your assumption that " PC Gaming is the only last great hurdle for Linux to become a universal operating system in competition to Windows" is

- arguably wrong, re. http://www.psychocats.net/essays/gamingperspective

- yet another example of "Linux would beat Microsoft if only it would do [insert very own pet peeve here]. lack of games, lack of general commercial applications, lack of easily installable/obtainable hardware drivers, different software installation models, too many distros, lack of point-and-click configuration, lack of "user-friendliness," bad marketing - take your pick , they all are "the single greatest hurdle" ( http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktopmyth )


but that doesn't really matter. Games on Linux : possible. Windows games on Linux : only if the game developers make it so. Simple as that.

mech7
August 21st, 2007, 09:01 PM
If most game vendors just chose to use OpenGL and the Open sound formats etc we would be further down the road.

If open gl development went quicker and had more innovations more game vendors would use open gl ;) not the other way aorund.

igknighted
August 21st, 2007, 09:20 PM
If open gl development went quicker and had more innovations more game vendors would use open gl ;) not the other way aorund.

OpenGL is aiming to be about 9 months behind DX10. Considering they are learning from DX10's failings (hopefully), I think that is reasonable. Plus OpenGl 3.0 is just better than DX10, and is multiplatform. The REAL problem is that MS makes sure that OpenGL performs poorly on Vista compared to DX10. At least it did with OpenGL 2, hopefully the OpenGL folks have worked around that.

icett
August 21st, 2007, 09:21 PM
the answer is no. It is NOT practically possible to make Linux compatible to all PC games. As pointed out before (eg post #4 , a.o.), games, like all applications, should be made to be compatible with the operating system they have to run on, not the other way around. What you are saying is something like "make oceans compatible with cars, because me and my car-loving friends don't like to travel by ship".

Your analogy to USSR communism is therefore useless, because it starts from the assumption that modifying Linux to support Windows games is practically possible. It is also just wrong by itself, because it suggests Linux made a deleberate, political choice not to support Windows games.
As for the "need to get commercial" - there are commercial distro's, there are distro's backed by big money (Ubuntu ?), there are distro's you have to buy rather than download, ... what's your point ? If "commercial" would be the magic that make your Windows-games-ojn-Linux happen, you'd have to be seeing them by now

As pointed out by a couple of people in this thread, Linux provides the necessary infrastructure for games (eg OpenGL). So it's really up to the game developers to develop Linux-compatible games. End of story.

Besides that, your assumption that " PC Gaming is the only last great hurdle for Linux to become a universal operating system in competition to Windows" is

- arguably wrong, re. http://www.psychocats.net/essays/gamingperspective

- yet another example of "Linux would beat Microsoft if only it would do [insert very own pet peeve here]. lack of games, lack of general commercial applications, lack of easily installable/obtainable hardware drivers, different software installation models, too many distros, lack of point-and-click configuration, lack of "user-friendliness," bad marketing - take your pick , they all are "the single greatest hurdle" ( http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktopmyth )


but that doesn't really matter. Games on Linux : possible. Windows games on Linux : only if the game developers make it so. Simple as that.




Ok. Keeping all things aside, as you say "Games on Linux : possible. Windows games on Linux: only if the game developers make it so", in short it is up to the game developers to create Linux compatible games. Right? Now let me know how the game developers would get convinced to create games compatible for Linux? They are making games for profit as this is their business. So how they would make games for Linux if they don't take it seriously because of the open source trend in the Linux community? They are not sure Linux users would buy their games. Mac has much less users than Linux but there are companies which create Mac compatible games, though a few. To create the gaming trend in Linux, distros would have to take the first step. They would have to create the compatibility in Linux for all the major hit game titles so that game developers know that there exists demand for games in the Linux community. Only after that they would think of producing games compatible for Linux. Do you agree with me? :)

igknighted
August 21st, 2007, 09:31 PM
Ok. Keeping all things aside, as you say "Games on Linux : possible. Windows games on Linux: only if the game developers make it so", in short it is up to the game developers to create Linux compatible games. Right? Now let me know how the game developers would get convinced to create games compatible for Linux? They are making games for profit as this is their business. So how they would make games for Linux if they don't take it seriously because of the open source trend in the Linux community? They are not sure Linux users would buy their games. Mac has much less users than Linux but there are companies which create Mac compatible games, though a few. To create the gaming trend in Linux, distros would have to take the first step. They would have to create the compatibility in Linux for all the major hit game titles so that game developers know that there exists demand for games in the Linux community. Only after that they would think of producing games compatible for Linux. Do you agree with me? :)

Not at all. If you spend all your time buying windows compatible games, linux native ones will never be a priority. We need to NOT buy games from companies that don't support linux and only buy from those that do. These are usually the same companies that create Mac native games. Between our two camps, if there is an effort to do this, we can change things. For example, if all the linux gamers bought UT2007 (its linux native) this fall instead of MS-only alternatives.

Roaster
August 21st, 2007, 09:39 PM
I have only recently started using Linux (Ubuntu), although back in my Macintosh days I did try to use Linux PPC ( never successful, I might add), I think it was. I have really started to enjoy using Ubuntu and some days I do not even boot up Windoze XP. My point is I wouldn't have to use it at all if Ubuntu did pc games. I have home built a couple of systems now and a family member wants me to build one for him. I wouldn't even install Windows XP or Vista, except that he wants to be able to play games. Where are the Linux games? and what IS Linux compatible hardware anyway? Just a noob looking for more:)

iota
August 21st, 2007, 09:45 PM
Not at all. If you spend all your time buying windows compatible games, linux native ones will never be a priority. We need to NOT buy games from companies that don't support linux and only buy from those that do. These are usually the same companies that create Mac native games. Between our two camps, if there is an effort to do this, we can change things. For example, if all the linux gamers bought UT2007 (its linux native) this fall instead of MS-only alternatives.

To be honest, us linux users are too small a part of the gaming scene. If we buy/don't buy the games it won't make a difference.

Remember that many of these gamers are the ones that buy 8800's now because they can't wait 3 months to pay several hundred pounds less, or the ones that bought 5950 ultras because they didn't care that 5900XT's were the same with a bios mod, or didn't bother to get the cheaper 6 series cards and just unlock the pixel pipes and vertex shaders.

Most gamers don't care about price, open source software/drivers or originality in their games- so why should the devs?

mips
August 21st, 2007, 10:01 PM
Weird thing is that I consider gaming for the younger generation. I don't play games. The other day I installed Sabayon 3.4e over my 3.3 install and i chose to install all ther games. Thing is I tried all the games like once and never went back so I'm gonna format & reinstall without the games.

Maybe I'm just to old but current games just dont appeal to me. Give me a amiga, snes emulator etc and I'm happy as the games are fun. No need to memorise 100 different key combos etc. MAME is still my all time favourite. One day I'm gonna build my own cabinet with a 20" screen. F#ck, how cool were games like Moon Patrol, Elevator Action,, Rygar etc.

igknighted
August 21st, 2007, 10:06 PM
To be honest, us linux users are too small a part of the gaming scene. If we buy/don't buy the games it won't make a difference.

Remember that many of these gamers are the ones that buy 8800's now because they can't wait 3 months to pay several hundred pounds less, or the ones that bought 5950 ultras because they didn't care that 5900XT's were the same with a bios mod, or didn't bother to get the cheaper 6 series cards and just unlock the pixel pipes and vertex shaders.

Most gamers don't care about price, open source software/drivers or originality in their games- so why should the devs?

I don't think linux and mac users combined are insignificant. Together we make up about 10% of the market. I feel safe lumping them together because many (most?) games that support one also support the other (they are very similar underneath). If we, as a group, supported *nix friendly games, theres enough draw to create some buzz at least. So can we control the market? No way. But we do have influence if we choose to use it.

icett
August 21st, 2007, 10:08 PM
Not at all. If you spend all your time buying windows compatible games, linux native ones will never be a priority. We need to NOT buy games from companies that don't support linux and only buy from those that do. These are usually the same companies that create Mac native games. Between our two camps, if there is an effort to do this, we can change things. For example, if all the linux gamers bought UT2007 (its linux native) this fall instead of MS-only alternatives.





I cant say for others but I surely would buy UT2007 to support Linux gaming. Besides I think that the whole Linux community including all the distros should dedicate one month for Games i.e. for the promotion of the gaming culture in Linux. Games have a distinct attraction for most people and games have the power to pull people using the other operating system to Linux. This one month could be a sort of celebration for Linux's efforts to get into the gaming world. During that month the staff and the top people of all the distros should contact all the major game develoers urging them to produce games compatible for Linux. Also all the Linux users should visit the forums of the major game developers requesting them to provide them with games compatible to their operating system. This could convince some developers to create Linux based games and begin the cycle of Linux games production. And provided the result is reasonable, there is a fair chance that other companies follow them. We should remember that games are a very good attraction and with them can follow more Linux users and of course hardware support.:)

original_jamingrit
August 21st, 2007, 10:56 PM
UT3 looks friggin' sweet, I'd get it even if it wasn't linux native.

But, uh, that's not what I wanted to post about.

It is _in_theory_ possible to get any game working with Linux 99% native, but unfortunately it would be next to impossible to port them. It is possible to decompile _some_ stuff, but there would be no symbols, variable labels, comments, etc, and making the proper tweaks and mods would be like finding a needle is a haystack (or a hayfield).

The alternative to that is WINE, or full-on emulators, but those still not perfect either. (I miss Planescape Torment).

iota
August 21st, 2007, 10:58 PM
I don't think linux and mac users combined are insignificant. Together we make up about 10% of the market. I feel safe lumping them together because many (most?) games that support one also support the other (they are very similar underneath). If we, as a group, supported *nix friendly games, theres enough draw to create some buzz at least. So can we control the market? No way. But we do have influence if we choose to use it.

I think 10% is a little generous, although mac games are gaining in popularity recently using macs for gaming is still considered somewhat of a joke in the gaming community. Linuxless so, mainly because gamers actually appreciate the use of linux in servers, but the gamers are almost all windows users.

(Even if they do dual-boot linux, which I hope some of them do)

Having said this, I can find no statistics to support what I just said :P But I have been a very active member of alot of gaming communities (overclocking, mvktech, guru3d, fragclub, ut2004, counterstrike etc.) over the years and so far my fellow linux users can be counted on one hand, and all were from one game (ut2004)

koenn
August 22nd, 2007, 05:19 PM
in short it is up to the game developers to create Linux compatible games. Right? Now let me know how the game developers would get convinced to create games compatible for Linux? They are making games for profit as this is their business. So how they would make games for Linux if they don't take it seriously because of the open source trend in the Linux community? They are not sure Linux users would buy their games. ...
It looks as if you think that because Linux + lots of Linux apps are open source and available free of charge, game developers or game vendors wouldn't be able to make a profit from selling games for Linux.
Wrong. Not everything that runs on Linux has to be open or available for free. Consider Oracle - a worl leader in database systems. Linux is their preferred platform (so much so that they've started their own Linux distribution). Yet Oracle software is sold in the traditional manner : nothing even close to open source, really expensive, and with classic user licenses: per user, per processor, and strict terms on how users/processors should be counted. Big business - and they're making quite a bit of profit, last time I checked. And you ask me how game vendors should make a profit from selling software for a Linux platform ?

"They are not sure Linux users would buy their games. ..."
I know nothing about marketing or sales. But some people do. They get payed to figure out how to sell a product to a target audience. It shouldn't be to hard to figure out how to sell games to Linux users if indeed games is what keeps gamers on Windows - because that implies that gamers would be willing to use Linux if someone was willing to sell them their games.

iota
August 22nd, 2007, 11:07 PM
It looks as if you think that because Linux + lots of Linux apps are open source and available free of charge, game developers or game vendors wouldn't be able to make a profit from selling games for Linux.
Wrong. Not everything that runs on Linux has to be open or available for free. Consider Oracle - a worl leader in database systems. Linux is their preferred platform (so much so that they've started their own Linux distribution). Yet Oracle software is sold in the traditional manner : nothing even close to open source, really expensive, and with classic user licenses: per user, per processor, and strict terms on how users/processors should be counted. Big business - and they're making quite a bit of profit, last time I checked. And you ask me how game vendors should make a profit from selling software for a Linux platform ?

"They are not sure Linux users would buy their games. ..."
I know nothing about marketing or sales. But some people do. They get payed to figure out how to sell a product to a target audience. It shouldn't be to hard to figure out how to sell games to Linux users if indeed games is what keeps gamers on Windows - because that implies that gamers would be willing to use Linux if someone was willing to sell them their games.

Yeah, but companies buying oracle are a little less likely to think to themselves "Wait, can't I just grab an iso off the net?".

Linux users are more likely to know how to find/download/install/run a pirated game, more likely to spend several hours downloading a 4gb dvd image and (in my opinion) less likely to pay for the software.

Ok, so this is all my opinion. But taking into account added cust of customer support for games released on linux (Extra training for help desk staff, higher paid more experienced developers etc.) their profit margins will be pretty narrow anyway.

koenn
August 23rd, 2007, 05:37 PM
Yeah, but companies buying oracle are a little less likely to think to themselves "Wait, can't I just grab an iso off the net?".
Linux users are more likely to know how to find/download/install/run a pirated game, more likely to spend several hours downloading a 4gb dvd image and (in my opinion) less likely to pay for the software.

OK, so now the problem is that software piracy is back-firing : there are no (or not enough) Linux games because noone would buy them, everyone just waits for a pirated version to become available.
Can't argue with that. :)
Can't really consider it a Linux-related problem either.

TechieZero
August 23rd, 2007, 06:32 PM
3) Most importantly, the gaming crowd is tiny. Compared to the entire body of computer users at least.

Actually, according to THIS (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Online-Gaming-Tops-Short-Video-Social-Nets-86805) online gaming now outweighs other broadband usage.

What needs to happen is that as others have suggested, more linux friendly games. If both Win and Linux can do OpenGL & OpenAL fairly well, why do DirectX? The game developers need to realize that even if the Linux users are a smaller percentage, they cheat themselves out of the potential to grab a larger crowd.

I bet however...M$ is greasing the wheels of the Devs w/ freebies etc --- just keep programming in our platform...MKay? If this is the case the Devs are being penny smart and dollar stupid as I think more ppl are catching on to how neat Linux has become --- me included. :)

iota
August 23rd, 2007, 08:59 PM
OK, so now the problem is that software piracy is back-firing : there are no (or not enough) Linux games because noone would buy them, everyone just waits for a pirated version to become available.
Can't argue with that. :)
Can't really consider it a Linux-related problem either.

Well, it's not really Linux related... I just think Linux users are a little less likely to pay for their games.

koenn
August 23rd, 2007, 09:14 PM
Well, it's not really Linux related... I just think Linux users are a little less likely to pay for their games.
.. and given that all pirated games today are windows games, that's a reasonable assumption :)

igknighted
August 23rd, 2007, 09:22 PM
Well, it's not really Linux related... I just think Linux users are a little less likely to pay for their games.

If the game you want MIGHT work in wine/cedega, why buy it? Plus if you do pirate it to be sure it works, why then go out and buy the real thing? I think a linux-compatible game would be a smash hit in the community because we would be so eager to support the company that helped us out.

tehkain
August 23rd, 2007, 09:27 PM
I believe the PS3 and Wii have their own OS-specific rendering libraries. For example, the PSP has the pspgu, which is similar to openGL but very different in many ways.
.

It is not similar to opengl - It is opengl. It is just a platform specific implementation. Going from Ps3 to wii or linux/mac is super easy because all you have o change is the specific code to that platform which is actually minor. Also most developent studios have simple software methods to write once and build on multiple opengl platforms. So it is vastly easier to release ps3, wii, and mac/linux then ps3, xbox360, wii, and WinPC

Support linux gaming - buy UT3.

happysmileman
August 23rd, 2007, 09:36 PM
Well, it's not really Linux related... I just think Linux users are a little less likely to pay for their games.

The problem with our logic is that despite most Linux users knowing HOW to do it, they also know WHY NOT to do it.

A very high percentage of Linux users are protective of it (to a fanboy level) or interested in/participating in development of software/websites compared to Windows users.
These people are much less likely to pirate games, either because they know actually buying them would benefit Linux, or because they know how hard it can be to develop, test and debug a program.

I for one, know how to pirate programs, but if I knew that I could help Linux support in future by paying for it I would, for both reasons above (I'm a fanboy, and though I haven't programmed anything in months, I'm 15 and interested in it as a career)

iota
August 23rd, 2007, 11:50 PM
The problem with our logic is that despite most Linux users knowing HOW to do it, they also know WHY NOT to do it.

A very high percentage of Linux users are protective of it (to a fanboy level) or interested in/participating in development of software/websites compared to Windows users.
These people are much less likely to pirate games, either because they know actually buying them would benefit Linux, or because they know how hard it can be to develop, test and debug a program.

I for one, know how to pirate programs, but if I knew that I could help Linux support in future by paying for it I would, for both reasons above (I'm a fanboy, and though I haven't programmed anything in months, I'm 15 and interested in it as a career)

I suppose you have a point there, it just depends how cynical you are. Personally I'm not inclined to believe Linux users (in practice) are any better than windows users when it comes to pirate software.

I just hope everyone buys a copy of ut3 :P