PDA

View Full Version : If you could Game on Ubuntu, Ubuntu would take over the world.



Pages : [1] 2

lylepratt
October 18th, 2007, 07:36 PM
I really mean what the title says. The fact that I can not play any game I want on Ubuntu is the only thing that prevents me from make the permanent switch on my desktop. My company owns VGPRO.com and we have a lot of contact with other gamers. Their opinions are all the same. "We'd switch to Ubuntu if only we could game!"

So, why aren't more resources being devoted to finding a free solution to the gaming problem on Ubuntu and every other linux distro?

Naegling23
October 18th, 2007, 07:42 PM
"I cant play halo 3 on my vista machine. therefore I would never want to use vista. I mean, who would want to run something that wont run all the games I want to play? This windows thing is never going to take off unless they let you play more games"

There are games on linux. There are windows only games. There are games that run on windows and mac, but not linux. There are games that only work on playstation/xbox/wii. There are games that run on linux only. Instead of saying that you cannot play play game A on linux, start saying that games x, y, and Z are available for linux. Once you start doing that, you'll see that there really are a lot of games for linux, especially considering the market share differential. If bioshock doesnt work on linux, its because they didnt port it to your system, not that your system is broken, and if they dont want your money, then be happy not giving it to them.

hikaricore
October 18th, 2007, 07:49 PM
... I have absolutely no trouble "gaming" /w Linux

wanna try that again?

Perhaps you and your other gamers should develop a game or a port of a game for Linux.
You could even contribute to an existing game or possibly the WINE project.

erginemr
October 18th, 2007, 08:00 PM
It will be difficult to try and convince the professional game developers to develop games for Linux, because the philosophy behind Linux is free software (as in free speech) and some Linux users believe that all software should be open source. Dont't get me wrong: not because they favor piracy or something, but because this is the philosophy behid Linux.

On the other hand, professional game developers are trying to make money. So...

Or am I wrong? What do you think on this?

lylepratt
October 18th, 2007, 08:04 PM
Well, my point is not that there are no games available to play under the linux platform. My point is that the game choices available that run on Linux platforms have no comparison with the game choices on the Windows platform. Obviously this is primarily due to the smaller market of linux gamers not being large enough to justify developers creating a port for the linux OS.

But, to say that the gaming environment of Linux is comparable with that of Windows is simply ludicrous.

Anyways, I am not here to rant on Ubuntu. I love linux and Ubuntu and run it on my laptop. I am simply imploring why there has not been a bigger push made for a gaming solution for linux that does not require development companies to port every game they make. Sure there is Wine and Crossover, but for the average n00b user, thats almost not even an option.

shad0w_walker
October 18th, 2007, 08:07 PM
I have no issues gaming on Ubuntu. I just finished playing Hl2: Episode 2 as it happens. Runs just as well as it did on my Windows setup and with out any issues I found.

Current games list:

Half-life 2 and Episodes 1 & 2 & Lost coast
Team Fortress 2
Portal
Garry's mod 10
Doom 3
Quake 4
Soldier of fortune
Homeworld 2 (wish i could find my home world 1 disc)
Stronghold
Darwinia
Defcon
Rail Road Tycoon 2
UFO: Alien invasion
Uplink
Unreal tournament (2003, 2004)

rybu
October 18th, 2007, 08:19 PM
Think from another point of view. Say you're an Ubuntu developer. Is it in your interest to just blindly expand the userbase? Or are you interested in users that will contribute?

Maybe I'm skeptical, but the gamers that want to switch to Ubuntu, they mostly want to do it to save money, and a lot of them know next to nothing about development. They're not really into the whole community spirit of the project.

I'm not saying it's a bad idea to expand the userbase, just that it's an idea that, on its own, does not interest me as much as say, getting users that develop really cool apps in their spare time.

And I'm not even an Ubuntu developer.

Naegling23
October 18th, 2007, 08:23 PM
Im a gamer, and I run ubuntu. I do not have a working copy of windows in my entire house. I get upset when people say that you "need" windows to play games, thats simply not true. Current game list:
Quake Wars (demo, hopefully the full game by tommorrow)
Doom3
UT2004
Neverwinter Nights
Frets on Fire

Via wine (by the way, they all run flawlessly)
World of Warcraft
Star Wars: Jedi Academy
Half life 2/oblivion are owned, and run under wine, but I dont play them.

My logitech g5, saitek eclipseII, and nostromo n52 gaming peripherals all work 100% too.
Not to mention that the two biggest gamer centric releases this year are quake wars and ut3...both run natively under linux. If you want to make a difference, then vote with your wallet (they track this stuff, they know what OS your using). Since ive become a full time linux user, I only buy games that have native linux ports, wine is used for legacy games.

The reason that there are not more linux games is that linux accounts for 1% of the desktop os usage. If linux gamers start to buy more games, the companies will follow the money tree. But if everyone gets upset and just boots into windows, then nothing will change.

rybu
October 18th, 2007, 08:41 PM
And if you want the dynamic to change, to start the process of getting more games available in linux, what needs to happen is a killer-app. A game for linux (and only linux) that everyone wants to play.

Because then you'll start getting windows users setting up dual-boot systems and starting to use linux. Then game developers will know they can develop for either platform without penalty. Then it'll be less risky to develop linux-only games.

TidusBlade
October 18th, 2007, 09:20 PM
What I think is that nobody wants to make a killer-game for linux, like if WoW was linux-only I'm sure there would have been so many games for linux now, I do hope to create good games for linux once I know how to but until then Im stuck hoping...

cogadh
October 18th, 2007, 09:42 PM
If WoW was Linux only, it wouldn't have been a successful game and the servers would likely have been shut down long ago. There aren't enough Linux users for a Linux only game to ever be considered truly successful. At best, Linux only games are homebrew successes, not global market successes.

derekr44
October 18th, 2007, 10:01 PM
It will be difficult to try and convince the professional game developers to develop games for Linux, because the philosophy behind Linux is free software (as in free speech) and some Linux users believe that all software should be open source. Dont't get me wrong: not because they favor piracy or something, but because this is the philosophy behid Linux.

On the other hand, professional game developers are trying to make money. So...

Or am I wrong? What do you think on this?

Not entirely accurate, but close. In my opinion, it isn't the fact that Linux is free, it's the ignorance that many people have in regards to GPL as in "free". Like we say here, free as in free beer isn't the same as free as in free speech.

Take iD and Epic games for example. They have produced native Linux versions of their popular games (UT2004 & Doom) and yet they still sell them. Just because a piece of software is written for a "free" kernel doesn't mean they have to give away their games at no cost. And they don't necessarily have to give their code out either. It just has to work on Linux.

IMO, the whole Linux thing comes down to ignorance. Your standard Windows users see Linux as a world for geeks and nerds. A Mac is more chic than Linux and is more socially acceptable to them. (just mention Apple iPod or Creative Zen and see the difference in response... heck, go watch the Mac ads on TV that constantly poke fun of Windows) Your software developers see Linux as a red-headed step-child that is a world for demanding hackers. To me, it all comes down to a lack of understanding of what Linux is all about.

If people actually bought Linux-native proprietary software, I think you'd see a shift in the right direction.

TidusBlade
October 18th, 2007, 10:47 PM
If WoW was Linux only, it wouldn't have been a successful game and the servers would likely have been shut down long ago. There aren't enough Linux users for a Linux only game to ever be considered truly successful. At best, Linux only games are homebrew successes, not global market successes.
Maybe, but seeing theres loads of people who play WoW on linux, looking at the amount of wow threads here, I would say that a big bunch of people would switch to ubuntu just to play it, If it was linux-only I would assume it should be easy as pie to install, but thats just what I would do...

cogadh
October 18th, 2007, 11:10 PM
Why would people switch to Linux for just a single game and then not be able to play any other games? I hate to break it to everyone, but games are not "killer apps" when it comes to the PC market. No one bought a Windows computer just because of a game, they bought for productivity purposes (word processing, e-mail, web browsing, etc.) and gaming is just a side benefit. If you are going to get something just for its gaming ability, then you are going to get a console, not a PC, no matter what the OS is.

TidusBlade
October 19th, 2007, 09:46 AM
Im just saying, it could lead into some type of chain effect, a few more games for Linux, then a few more... Unless what you said will happen, nobody plays it, then no more Linux-Only games.

Druke
October 19th, 2007, 09:55 AM
In reality what linux gaming needs is an OpenGL psuh. The number one thing that keeps us form gamming is DirectX, that is the antagonist.

DirectX isn't just graphics though, we also need SDL, and SDL-sound.

I really blame a lack of PR on those three things for us not having many linux games.

Even if its not going to OpenGl, companies could do more things like CCP (creators of eve-online) did http://www.transgaming.com/news/?id=60 . They cannot make the game from the ground up so they do the next best thing.


But the ultimate solution would be for there to be a standard (like every thing else) perhaps the OGDS or open graphic design, which is jsut a formal binding of opengl,sdl and sdl's sound stuff in one easy to use package.

jagwah
October 19th, 2007, 10:09 AM
I hate to break it to everyone, but games are not "killer apps" when it comes to the PC market. No one bought a Windows computer just because of a game, they bought for productivity purposes (word processing, e-mail, web browsing, etc.) and gaming is just a side benefit. If you are going to get something just for its gaming ability, then you are going to get a console, not a PC, no matter what the OS is.

Absolutely not true, The reason, the only reason I brought my first computer back in 1998, and every computer I have brought/built since then, is for one purpose, and one purpose only, Gaming, if it weren't for gaming I wouldn't be here now, if I ever stop gaming, I will not own a PC anymore. I am far from being alone in this, there are many, many like myself, who's main purpose for using a PC, is for Gaming, everything else is as you say, " just a side benefit"


Gaming drives the hardware market, if it weren't for high end gaming we would not see/need the speed of things like CPU/GPu's we have today. Gaming is in actuall fact, (literally) bigger than Hollywood now, it isn't some small sideline, it is, in many cases the 'Main Attraction'.

Faud
October 19th, 2007, 12:20 PM
In reality what linux gaming needs is an OpenGL psuh. The number one thing that keeps us form gamming is DirectX, that is the antagonist.

DirectX isn't just graphics though, we also need SDL, and SDL-sound.

I really blame a lack of PR on those three things for us not having many linux games.

Even if its not going to OpenGl, companies could do more things like CCP (creators of eve-online) did http://www.transgaming.com/news/?id=60 . They cannot make the game from the ground up so they do the next best thing.


But the ultimate solution would be for there to be a standard (like every thing else) perhaps the OGDS or open graphic design, which is jsut a formal binding of opengl,sdl and sdl's sound stuff in one easy to use package.


Isnt ReactOS going to be fully compatiable with DirectX or isnt that one of the things they are aiming at ?
I have to admit that having a "windows' clone would probaly bug me seeing as how much I love Ubuntu but it might be interesting if they pull it off.

Surgeon General
October 19th, 2007, 12:41 PM
not only because of applications that people would switch OS. it is also because of what that OS can or cannot do. just search the forums and you will see people are still having problems getting the right resolution for their displays. for Windows users this is the first thing they would notice as this is the first thing that greets them when they boot their Windows OS.

the ability to change a resolution by simply clicking on a few options as opposed to doing "sudo gedit /etc/X/config" matters ALOT.

Naegling23
October 19th, 2007, 01:18 PM
The solution isnt a linux only game. If a game is linux only, then how will the windows users even know it exits? It certainly wont get advertised on monday night football.

And I dont think the linux philosophy (free as in beer) harms games at all. If you follow these forums, the top games, and recommended games are things like WoW, Doom3, Quake 4. All commercial games. I find that linux users are more than happy to pay for good software, they just dont because, well, there just isnt too much comercial software available for linux. Hey, if there is a commercial app that is better than an open source app for linux, I will buy it (thats why I buy games) and im sure a lot of people do too.

I notice a lot of people on other forums and the web that say things like "I would like to use linux, but gameX does not work, so its windows only for me". If game X runs on linux, then people will be willing to try it out. I think a lot of people are becoming frustrated with Microsoft and Apple, and want to feel like they own their OS. As well as the rise of open source (programs like Open office and firefox) showing people that open source does work, is convincing people to take a look at linux. Once they take a look, if they find out that their games and whatnot work, then they might be here to stay. I tried linux out of curiosity, I kept coming back for the customization and programs like amarok. I stayed once I realized that ut2004 could be run from linux.

The good news is that each ubuntu release seems to push linux ahead if ever so slightly, and more people are at least dual booting, so the market for commercial games will be growing. If iD and epic note large linux sales, or dell announces large linux orders, the industry might have an "Ah ha!" moment.

derekr44
October 19th, 2007, 01:53 PM
I agree with you, Naegling23. It's really a combination of things. And I've seen some positive shifts in the Linux direction for the past few years.

IMO, Microsoft and Apple have shot themselves in the foot this last year with Vista and the blatantly overpriced iPhone. It's a very good time for any Linux distro to take advantage of the situation. Ubuntu is doing a very good job.

FredB
October 19th, 2007, 01:57 PM
Games are not only the latest commercial s-hits !

What about gnome-games ? KDE-games ? What about happy-penguin.org ? :)

derekr44
October 19th, 2007, 02:02 PM
Oh I haven't checked out Happy Penguin. Any good?

cogadh
October 19th, 2007, 02:43 PM
Absolutely not true, The reason, the only reason I brought my first computer back in 1998, and every computer I have brought/built since then, is for one purpose, and one purpose only, Gaming, if it weren't for gaming I wouldn't be here now, if I ever stop gaming, I will not own a PC anymore. I am far from being alone in this, there are many, many like myself, who's main purpose for using a PC, is for Gaming, everything else is as you say, " just a side benefit"


Gaming drives the hardware market, if it weren't for high end gaming we would not see/need the speed of things like CPU/GPu's we have today. Gaming is in actuall fact, (literally) bigger than Hollywood now, it isn't some small sideline, it is, in many cases the 'Main Attraction'.

I would argue that you and others who do so are the exception to the rule and greatly in the minority. Sure there are "hard-core" gamers out there who only use a PC for gaming, but there are over 650 million PCs in the world today. The vast majority of those PCs are used for business, scientific and educational purposes. Of those that are for home use, they mostly serve informational purposes first, gaming second.

I do agree that gaming is currently driving hardware evolution in terms of graphics and possibly sound, but it is most definitely not what drives processor evolution and it is not what started the graphics revolution. 3D CAD workstaions started the graphics revolution, scientific and military needs started the processor on the path of Moore's law, not games. Games and their related hardware have benefited from that evolution and the breakthroughs that it produced, but gaming is not responsible for it at all.

When you look at the "gaming industry" and call it bigger than Hollywood, that is the gaming industry as a whole. We are talking just the PC market, which right now is only a portion of the total gaming market. A portion that is significantly smaller than the console business and is on the decline. PC gaming only accounts for about 8% - 9% of the total gaming market. In that Hollywood comparison, that makes PC gaming around equal to the "direct to video" movie market (I am not talking adult videos, more like Steven Seagal videos). That doesn't seem like a main attraction to me.

Don't get me wrong, I am a huge fan of PC gaming and nothing I have said is meant to be insulting to gamers or gaming, but facts are facts:

PC gaming is only a small portion of the gaming market
Linux only makes up a small potion of the PC market
The vast majority of PCs are used for mundane purposes first and gaming second

Because of that, it is not gaming that will drive Linux forward, it is the "mundane purposes" that will drive it forward. Once it has spread through those mundane uses, the games will come. However, I think it is far more likely that we will see cross-platform games based on open standards, rather than Linux only games.

Eddie Wilson
October 19th, 2007, 04:32 PM
I totally agree with cogadh. I feel that is the way the pc gaming market is headed. My first gaming console was an Atari 2600 and my first computer was a Tandy Color Computer. Both were bought for a different purpose. I believe its the same way today.
Eddie

Dethis
October 19th, 2007, 04:43 PM
if ubuntu could run exe's it would most definatly take over:lolflag:

justin whitaker
October 19th, 2007, 04:46 PM
Maybe, but seeing theres loads of people who play WoW on linux, looking at the amount of wow threads here, I would say that a big bunch of people would switch to ubuntu just to play it, If it was linux-only I would assume it should be easy as pie to install, but thats just what I would do...

World of Warcraft is a bad example: you are assuming that because it is a success on Windows, then it would have had equal success on Linux.

I would say that the success of World of Warcraft is because of it's ubiquity and accessibility, both of which are partially tied to Windows.

It is easy to install on Windows, everyone has a windows desktop, and no one had to do anything drastic, like changing operating systems to use it.

If anything, I think people will go out of their way not to switch OSes to play a game. Take a look at what happened to Halo 2: people did not flock to Vista in droves to play the game, instead, they figured out a hack to run it on their existing system. Or they ignored it. Or got a 360.

cogadh
October 19th, 2007, 04:46 PM
if ubuntu could run exe's it would most definatly take over:lolflag:
It can, just not all of them and you have to install Wine first.

Em-Buntu
October 19th, 2007, 04:49 PM
I don't play many games, but I was curious to see how well a shooter game would run under Feisty, so I downloaded the latest version of ALIEN ARENA and installed it.
It runs really well under Ubuntu.

Maybe you'd like to give it a try.
You can download the complete game here, at Red Planet Arena.

http://red.planetarena.org/

ukripper
October 19th, 2007, 04:49 PM
When consoles can play almost every new generation games why stress your Ubuntu machine for? Buy Xbox 360 and have fun with PGR4 HAlO3, GEARS OF WAR and i bet you'll never go back to PC for gaming.

XBOX 360 LIVE just rocks !!!!:guitar:

Druke
October 19th, 2007, 04:52 PM
Need Eve-online and other intelligent games (luckily they've teamed with transgaming)

justin whitaker
October 19th, 2007, 04:53 PM
When consoles can play almost every new generation games why stress your Ubuntu machine for? Buy Xbox 360 and have fun with PGR4 HAlO3, GEARS OF WAR and i bet you'll never go back to PC for gaming.

XBOX 360 LIVE just rocks !!!!:guitar:

Amen to that.

Halo 3, Gears, Bioshock + Orange Box pretty much covers my gaming, with the exception of World of Warcraft.

That is the one thing that the 360 is really missing: a good, immersive, MMORPG.

ukripper
October 19th, 2007, 04:58 PM
Amen to that.

Halo 3, Gears, Bioshock + Orange Box pretty much covers my gaming, with the exception of World of Warcraft.

That is the one thing that the 360 is really missing: a good, immersive, MMORPG.

I love racing, sports and FPS so I guess 360 gives me all i expect from gaming and bloody good time when you are in same team with your mates and communicating through headset over Xbox Live and everyone has same hardware which means all depends on your personal skills not your hardware.

cogadh
October 19th, 2007, 04:59 PM
When consoles can play almost every new generation games why stress your Ubuntu machine for? Buy Xbox 360 and have fun with PGR4 HAlO3, GEARS OF WAR and i bet you'll never go back to PC for gaming.

XBOX 360 LIVE just rocks !!!!:guitar:

FPS games suck without a mouse/keyboard.
Why spend the money on a console when I already have a decent gaming machine in my PC?
FPS games still suck without a mouse and keyboard.
PC games offer greater additional content/expansion with mods and such, though the consoles are getting better at that.
Did I mention FPS games suck without a mouse and keyboard?
Buying an Xbox is just putting more undeserved money in Bill Gates' pockets.
FPS games suck without... yadda, yadda, yadda

rolnics
October 19th, 2007, 05:03 PM
When consoles can play almost every new generation games why stress your Ubuntu machine for? Buy Xbox 360 and have fun with PGR4 HAlO3, GEARS OF WAR and i bet you'll never go back to PC for gaming.

XBOX 360 LIVE just rocks !!!!:guitar:

Nice idea, but if like me you ain't so flushed with the ready's, buying an XBOX 360 or the like, is out of the question!

I'm still running a 3/4yr old pc, with a top of the range geforce 4ti4200!!! :lolflag:

ukripper
October 19th, 2007, 05:03 PM
FPS games suck without a mouse/keyboard.
Why spend the money on a console when I already have a decent gaming machine in my PC?
FPS games still suck without a mouse and keyboard.
PC games offer greater additional content/expansion with mods and such, though the consoles are getting better at that.
Did I mention FPS games suck without a mouse and keyboard?
Buying an Xbox is just putting more undeserved money in Bill Gates' pockets.
FPS games suck without... yadda, yadda, yadda


Decent means atleast 8800 GTX card which is about 220 alone in uk. and XBOX 360 Premium as whole cost me 260 with one extra wireless controller HAlO3 and Forza2.

Question is - Why spend money on a single Decent Graphics card when you can buy a new full fledged gaming system for slightly more quid?


Don't get me wrong I have 7600GT and finsished Half life2 and COD2 on it but console experience in my opinion is far more better as you don't have opponents on internet cheating against you with better hardware

cogadh
October 19th, 2007, 05:08 PM
Decent means atleast 8800 GTX card which is about 220 alone in uk. and XBOX 360 Premium as whole cost me 260 with one extra wireless controller HAlO3 and Forza2.

Question is - Why spend money on a single Decent Graphics card when you can buy a new full fledged gaming system for slightly more quid?
Because FPS games suck without a mouse and keyboard... I thought I made that abundantly clear. :)

If I had a HDTV for a console or HD monitor for my PC, then that might mean that a graphics card upgrade or console purchase would cancel each other out, but since I have neither, getting any console (except maybe a Wii) is not worth it, my PC produces much nicer results already.

jbdev
October 19th, 2007, 05:09 PM
FPS games suck without a mouse/keyboard.
Why spend the money on a console when I already have a decent gaming machine in my PC?
FPS games still suck without a mouse and keyboard.
PC games offer greater additional content/expansion with mods and such, though the consoles are getting better at that.
Did I mention FPS games suck without a mouse and keyboard?
Buying an Xbox is just putting more undeserved money in Bill Gates' pockets.
FPS games suck without... yadda, yadda, yadda



One more time ...

FPS games suck without a mouse/keyboard. !!!!

Enough said ..

I have tried to get into a FPS on XBOX/PS/cube..

NO WAY !!! NO THANK YOU

ukripper
October 19th, 2007, 05:13 PM
One more time ...

FPS games suck without a mouse/keyboard. !!!!

Enough said ..

I have tried to get into a FPS on XBOX/PS/cube..

NO WAY !!! NO THANK YOU

well that's your opinion! in my opinion I like HALO2 and HALO3 on XBOX and XBOX 360 respectively for much richer experience.

Enough said!!!

justin whitaker
October 19th, 2007, 05:16 PM
[LIST=1]
FPS games suck without a mouse/keyboard.

I find myself missing the dual sticks when I am on WASD these days.


Why spend the money on a console when I already have a decent gaming machine in my PC?

I don't have a decent gaming PC. I have a 6600LE, 2GB Ram, AMD 3200+, and it won't run anything current on "High". The Xbox is a good way around that.


PC games offer greater additional content/expansion with mods and such, though the consoles are getting better at that.

U3 will have mod support across all platforms. I just miss The Hidden. If there were a 360 port of Counterstike, that would be awesome as well.


Buying an Xbox is just putting more undeserved money in Bill Gates' pockets.

Not as sure about that.

The XBox Live service does what it is supposed to do, and does it well. The games that run on it appeal to my gaming tastes...not all of them, since I am missing an MMORPG, but most of them. The hardware is buggy, but they know about it, and have taken the appropriate customer service steps to alleviate it.

Game consoles aren't a monopoly: you can buy Sony or Nintendo if you don't want to give Microsoft more money...but I'm not certain that spending money on a 360 puts more "undeserved money" in Microsoft's coffer. To my mind, other than Office, the 360 is the only product they got right.

Or are we just going to say "Microsoft is evil and any product from them is bad?"

lespaul_rentals
October 19th, 2007, 05:26 PM
Sure there is Wine and Crossover, but for the average n00b user, thats almost not even an option.

Well...I don't want to sound elitist, but is Linux really intended for the n00b users? I think any and all community is a great thing, don't get me wrong, but the only time I've ever heard of wine or Crossover being an issue was when someone was unwilling to learn. Ubuntu doesn't need any more people who install their distro and complain about all the "advanced" stuff they have to do.

There's a reason that more games are made for Windows. Obviously, a larger market share is the main reason. It always annoys me when people complain about gaming on Linux. Buy a freaking Xbox or PS3 -- or heck, even stay with Windows -- but stop whining about the selection of games for Linux. If you are going to live your life governed by PC games, I honestly don't think Linux is for you. I used to play Halo Custom Edition back in my Windows days and I got pretty good; I was part of some large, powerful clans. However, I don't use computers for gaming only, and reducing any operating system to a gaming platform is a huge offense. Computers are made to perform calculations, design and build, and increase productivity. Watching videos, playing games, browsing the web -- those are all side tasks. Consoles are for gaming, they're dedicated gaming computers.

I'm sorry if I sound rude, but threads like this kind of rub me the wrong way. If you don't like Linux because of the lack of games in comparison to Windows, Linux is not for you. You can game in Linux (openarena and Tremulous come to mind) but I think that not switching over simply because of differences in number and types of games between the two kernels means you are not enough in love with Tux.

Sorry if I come across as rude, but this thread has been done 10^10 times.

Em-Buntu
October 19th, 2007, 05:26 PM
I don't play many games, but I wanted to see how a shooter would run and downloaded ALIEN ARENA.
AA runs great on my platform under Feisty. I haven't tried it yet under Gutsy, but I imagine it should run just as well.

Download full game here
http://red.planetarena.org/

ukripper
October 19th, 2007, 05:29 PM
.

ukripper
October 19th, 2007, 05:30 PM
Well...I don't want to sound elitist, but is Linux really intended for the n00b users? I think any and all community is a great thing, don't get me wrong, but the only time I've ever heard of wine or Crossover being an issue was when someone was unwilling to learn. Ubuntu doesn't need any more people who install their distro and complain about all the "advanced" stuff they have to do.

There's a reason that more games are made for Windows. Obviously, a larger market share is the main reason. It always annoys me when people complain about gaming on Linux. Buy a freaking Xbox or PS3 -- or heck, even stay with Windows -- but stop whining about the selection of games for Linux. If you are going to live your life governed by PC games, I honestly don't think Linux is for you. I used to play Halo Custom Edition back in my Windows days and I got pretty good; I was part of some large, powerful clans. However, I don't use computers for gaming only, and reducing any operating system to a gaming platform is a huge offense. Computers are made to perform calculations, design and build, and increase productivity. Watching videos, playing games, browsing the web -- those are all side tasks. Consoles are for gaming, they're dedicated gaming computers.

I'm sorry if I sound rude, but threads like this kind of rub me the wrong way. If you don't like Linux because of the lack of games in comparison to Windows, Linux is not for you. You can game in Linux (openarena and Tremulous come to mind) but I think that not switching over simply because of differences in number and types of games between the two kernels means you are not enough in love with Tux.

Sorry if I come across as rude, but this thread has been done 10^10 times.

Well summed up!:KS Totally agree with you in this case

ukripper
October 19th, 2007, 05:33 PM
I don't play many games, but I wanted to see how a shooter would run and downloaded ALIEN ARENA.
AA runs great on my platform under Feisty. I haven't tried it yet under Gutsy, but I imagine it should run just as well.

Download full game here
http://red.planetarena.org/

My personal fav is open arena on ubuntu.

cogadh
October 19th, 2007, 05:35 PM
Not as sure about that.

The XBox Live service does what it is supposed to do, and does it well. The games that run on it appeal to my gaming tastes...not all of them, since I am missing an MMORPG, but most of them. The hardware is buggy, but they know about it, and have taken the appropriate customer service steps to alleviate it.

Game consoles aren't a monopoly: you can buy Sony or Nintendo if you don't want to give Microsoft more money...but I'm not certain that spending money on a 360 puts more "undeserved money" in Microsoft's coffer. To my mind, other than Office, the 360 is the only product they got right.

Or are we just going to say "Microsoft is evil and any product from them is bad?"
Perhaps I should have said he doesn't deserve any more of my money or money I am responsible for. I have given Microsoft more money than I can count over the years, both out of my own pocket and out of employer's pockets. I have had to deal with their draconian licensing contracts and seen some of their questionable practices in person. I don't feel they or Bill Gates deserve to get any more money from me, no matter how good a product may be. But, that's just my opinion based on the experiences I have had with MS.

ukripper
October 19th, 2007, 05:43 PM
Perhaps I should have said he doesn't deserve any more of my money or money I am responsible for. I have given Microsoft more money than I can count over the years, both out of my own pocket and out of employer's pockets. I have had to deal with their draconian licensing contracts and seen some of their questionable practices in person. I don't feel they or Bill Gates deserve to get any more money from me, no matter how good a product may be. But, that's just my opinion based on the experiences I have had with MS.

i wonder why you had to use MS at first place if you hate them that much! As other service providers they charged you in terms with your contracts

Em-Buntu
October 19th, 2007, 05:44 PM
bump

cogadh
October 19th, 2007, 06:43 PM
bump
Don't bump threads, it's really not required.


i wonder why you had to use MS at first place if you hate them that much! As other service providers they charged you in terms with your contracts

I didn't hate MS until they screwed me over. I had to use MS because there was no viable alternative at the time. Linux had not matured enough and the generally accepted standard in a business environment was Windows. The contract we negotiated was agreed upon provided MS met certain goals within the limits of the contract, which they did not. For example, as part of the Software Assurance agreement, MS guaranteed that we were entitled to an upgrade of all of products licensed under the Software Assurance contract at no additional cost (other than the millions we already spent on the contract). We were told that included the OS and that the next version of the OS would be released within the time limit of the contract. That next version of the OS did not appear as expected, and the best MS could offer as compensation for the millions of dollars they had already taken was a discount on licensing additional products. They then proceeded to try and negotiate a new multi-million dollar contract for extending the Software Assurance another three years. So they lied, took our money, offered only token compensation and then tried to get more money out of us!

The funny part is, they started off the new negotiations by assuring us that the new OS would definitely be out before the expiration of the new three year contract. The new OS was Vista and it came out (for businesses) in Nov 2006. The contract would have expired in July 2006. Good thing I recommended against continuing contractual work with MS.

terryshaw09
October 19th, 2007, 07:51 PM
Maybe eventually most games will be supported on ubuntu.

hikaricore
October 19th, 2007, 08:04 PM
Maybe eventually most games will be supported on ubuntu.

It isn't an issue of the games not being supported on Ubuntu...
It's that the games were written for ***dows/Mac and not Linux.

You can't run ***dows/Mac applications on an environment they weren't designed for without third party software such as WINE for example. It's just not even possible otherwise.

Did you even read this thread? :confused:

Cyberbian
October 22nd, 2007, 01:31 AM
You slipstream XP down to a CD LIVE capable size.
You image that for VM software, You run the VM on Ubuntu
You play the MS format game on Ubuntu!

Kiss MS Goodbye! Sell Mortimer Sell!

cogadh
October 22nd, 2007, 01:48 AM
VM's can't run 3D accelerated graphics. VurtualBox is supposed to be able to with the next version, but AFAIK, none of the current versions can do that.

bkreeder100
October 22nd, 2007, 04:03 AM
Reading your threads you all seem to think that all computer users will goto the effort of learning the Linux CLI to run there games. I am sorry to say most computer users just want point-n-click. Knowing this if the programmers of all Linux Ports really and I mean REALLY want to get the Linux OS off the Internet and out on the home users systems then their really needs to be some thought to the Program Installation Program.

I know that it really installs the Linux Programs really well BUT when the basic Home User purchases a program from the Shelf of the Stores. He doesn't want to re-invent the installation program so it will work on his computer. He wants to just load it and have it install automatically or click an install file and when it loads it will work. No learning the CLI or Reading TONS of Man-Pages to get the thing to work. And I have the same train of thought. I hate to have to tweek the files and the system to make a program work. I will but I hate the effort all the time because my time is more valuable than that also I know that there is someone that has done it before like you all but you are all unwilling to write a step-by-step process and post it or you have but have written it for people that understand the file system and forget that not everyone knows how to use the CLI, or how to open a tar file, much less how to use MAKE.

The real problem behind the Linux OS overcoming Windows is the Linux community getting over their EGO's about knowing how to use the CLI, and making a real effort to make the X Windows System more USER Friendly like the MS System is and has been for Years now. When that happens then the Virtual War of Linux over MS Windows will be Finished and Over.

KhaaL
October 22nd, 2007, 05:38 AM
(...)

This has been discussed countless times before.

You know what? I switched to ubuntu because I *DO* want an easly maintained system, aka point-n-click. The only times I've have to use CLI before was to edit xorg.conf file, now you don't even need that since there's a graphical tool for it.

i know you're talking about re-inventing installing programs, but honestly, which do you consider more userfriendly?

Doubleclicking an exe
OR
doubleclicking a .deb/.bin file - alternatively installing via apt and having it updated regularly

Removing a program via control panel and use 3rd party tools to clean up remains after the program
OR
purging via apt

Having your settings spread all over the system (installed program folder, win folder, registery, my docs...)
OR
in your home folder


Installing drivers and updating the system is considerably easier in ubuntu than in windows, and you don't need to read tons of man pages for that (you only need that for advanced tweaking of your system). You don't need either 10 cd's or running like a headless chicken all over the net in order to find a driver.

Linux does support more hardware out of the box than windows - however some hardware dosen't have it's full functionality due to lack of driver support.

And I agree with you regarding arrogant linux users that try to have some status by saying "RTFM" or "Learn the command line"... They still exist (although should be eliminated :twisted:). But that's the beauty of ubuntu - everyone is very helpful and friendly. That is what made me stay in ubuntuland.


Oh, and you know, Since i've been using linux for the past two years, i've never compiled a program ;)

ukripper
October 22nd, 2007, 10:41 AM
I know that it really installs the Linux Programs really well BUT when the basic Home User purchases a program from the Shelf of the Stores. He doesn't want to re-invent the installation program so it will work on his computer. He wants to just load it and have it install automatically or click an install file and when it loads it will work. No learning the CLI or Reading TONS of Man-Pages to get the thing to work. And I have the same train of thought. I hate to have to tweek the files and the system to make a program work. I will but I hate the effort all the time because my time is more valuable than that also I know that there is someone that has done it before like you all but you are all unwilling to write a step-by-step process and post it or you have but have written it for people that understand the file system and forget that not everyone knows how to use the CLI, or how to open a tar file, much less how to use MAKE.

The real problem behind the Linux OS overcoming Windows is the Linux community getting over their EGO's about knowing how to use the CLI, and making a real effort to make the X Windows System more USER Friendly like the MS System is and has been for Years now. When that happens then the Virtual War of Linux over MS Windows will be Finished and Over.

You really have no clue about Linux have you?

lespaul_rentals
October 26th, 2007, 06:11 PM
Reading your threads you all seem to think that all computer users will goto the effort of learning the Linux CLI to run there games. I am sorry to say most computer users just want point-n-click. Knowing this if the programmers of all Linux Ports really and I mean REALLY want to get the Linux OS off the Internet and out on the home users systems then their really needs to be some thought to the Program Installation Program.

I know that it really installs the Linux Programs really well BUT when the basic Home User purchases a program from the Shelf of the Stores. He doesn't want to re-invent the installation program so it will work on his computer. He wants to just load it and have it install automatically or click an install file and when it loads it will work. No learning the CLI or Reading TONS of Man-Pages to get the thing to work. And I have the same train of thought. I hate to have to tweek the files and the system to make a program work. I will but I hate the effort all the time because my time is more valuable than that also I know that there is someone that has done it before like you all but you are all unwilling to write a step-by-step process and post it or you have but have written it for people that understand the file system and forget that not everyone knows how to use the CLI, or how to open a tar file, much less how to use MAKE.

The real problem behind the Linux OS overcoming Windows is the Linux community getting over their EGO's about knowing how to use the CLI, and making a real effort to make the X Windows System more USER Friendly like the MS System is and has been for Years now. When that happens then the Virtual War of Linux over MS Windows will be Finished and Over.

Egos? What? Mate, sometimes in Linux you do in fact have to use the shell to perform tasks, but this is usually when you are trying to do something that is not a basic use of a computer. You can browse the web, listen to music, and all that without ever touching the command line interface. Futhermore, I have never heard anyone on these boards have an ego when talking about the command line. It'd be a pretty pointless thing to have an ego about, and if they really were that arrogant there wouldn't be a support forum dedicated to helping noobs learn about Linux. Just look at Absolute Beginner Talk. A noob can go in there, say "Something's broken, help me out," and people who have a desire to help will come assist. It's not like they say "OMG LOL U NOOB, U MUST USE CLI LIKE A REEL LINUKS HAX0R." No way, if command line interface is required, it's required. They'll post the codes to enter into the terminal, and so long as the threadstarter follows the directions, most of the time the problem will be fixed.

And of course Average Joe wants to go to Best Buy and buy Some Program 2007, stick in the CD, and watch it install for him. Do you know how many scores of applications I have watched install in front of my very eyes after simply running a .deb or .rpm file through my favorite installer? It's really not that hard, and in the instance you do have to compile an application, you are probably wandering into advanced user territory. Mr. Joe is a Windows guy, because he's caught in the idea that paying 30 USD for Some Program 2007 and installing it on his 300 USD copy of Vista is a good way of doing things. I am a Linux guy, because I feel that going into the repositories (for free), downloading Some Program 2007 OS (for free) and installing it on my Linux kernel (that was free too) is a much better way of doing things. It's just as easy, and my wallet likes it too.

And, for the last time: All PC-based operating systems, be it Windows, Linux, BSD, are not intended for gaming. You could build a thousand-dollar computer and install Windows Vista Ultimate, but the fact remains that your computer isn't meant for gaming. Computers are meant for web browsing, performing calculations, business, communications, etc. No one said "Hey guys, let's make something that will perform efficient calculations and the like, but will also play Half-Life 2." Games are only a secondary priority for any kernel.

Stop complaining about CLI, the ego of Linux users, and the lack of games for Linux. Go to a gaming company and tell them to start porting games to Linux. It's not Linus Torvalds' fault you can't play Halo. It's Microsoft's! If you live your life and make your operating system/kernel decisions based on games, Linux is simply not the place for you. Buy a gaming system like the Xbox, PS3, Gamecube, whatever floats your boat. These are made for games, and games primarily. Some (like the Xbox, based off Windows NT) are modifications of kernels, but the fact remains that they are tuned for the playing of games. If we make Linux just like Microsoft, with Playskool-style interface, and a 0-learning-curve attitude, Linux will simply become a noob-fest of people asking where the start button is.

I posted this earlier in the thread, and now I will quote myself:


Well...I don't want to sound elitist, but is Linux really intended for the n00b users? I think any and all community is a great thing, don't get me wrong, but the only time I've ever heard of wine or Crossover being an issue was when someone was unwilling to learn. Ubuntu doesn't need any more people who install their distro and complain about all the "advanced" stuff they have to do.

There's a reason that more games are made for Windows. Obviously, a larger market share is the main reason. It always annoys me when people complain about gaming on Linux. Buy a freaking Xbox or PS3 -- or heck, even stay with Windows -- but stop whining about the selection of games for Linux. If you are going to live your life governed by PC games, I honestly don't think Linux is for you. I used to play Halo Custom Edition back in my Windows days and I got pretty good; I was part of some large, powerful clans. However, I don't use computers for gaming only, and reducing any operating system to a gaming platform is a huge offense. Computers are made to perform calculations, design and build, and increase productivity. Watching videos, playing games, browsing the web -- those are all side tasks. Consoles are for gaming, they're dedicated gaming computers.

I'm sorry if I sound rude, but threads like this kind of rub me the wrong way. If you don't like Linux because of the lack of games in comparison to Windows, Linux is not for you. You can game in Linux (openarena and Tremulous come to mind) but I think that not switching over simply because of differences in number and types of games between the two kernels means you are not enough in love with Tux.

Sorry if I come across as rude, but this thread has been done 10^10 times.

KhaaL
October 29th, 2007, 07:23 PM
And, for the last time: All PC-based operating systems, be it Windows, Linux, BSD, are not intended for gaming.

That may have been the case when PCs was just introduced to the massmarket, but today is a diffrent case. Gamers have the HW manufacturers attention since they (or their parents) put a lot of dough in their rigs.



Well...I don't want to sound elitist, but is Linux really intended for the n00b users? I think any and all community is a great thing, don't get me wrong, but the only time I've ever heard of wine or Crossover being an issue was when someone was unwilling to learn.

The "n00b" word aside, which I have a personal jihad against, I think Ubuntu has made clear that Linux is for everyone, even for the novice user. And I think you have a strange view of wine... For me it's essental to play the games I love and that I have fond memories from, not because I'm unwilling to learn - but because the other choice, to install/reboot into windows, is a choice I refuse to make.

mrkawphy
October 29th, 2007, 10:59 PM
Small community?

5 million active users playing "world of warcraft" Per Blizzard (say even only 4 million if they are indeed inflating there numbers)

Here are afew more stats that I find interesting to a very "small" community.

Source:http://archive.gamespy.com/stats/



1. Half Life
37847 servers, 111873 players


2. Half Life 2
33474 servers, 95090 players


3. Battlefield 2
4931 servers, 22853 players


4. Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory
3383 servers, 12425 players


5. Battlefield 2142
1999 servers, 9218 players


6. Call of Duty
3071 servers, 6555 players


7. Unreal Tournament 2004
1986 servers, 5911 players


8. Call of Duty 2
643 servers, 5603 players


9. Americas Army: Special Forces
1942 servers, 4029 players


10. Quake 3: Arena
1797 servers, 3734 players


11. Enemy Territory: Quake Wars
1779 servers, 3092 players


12. Medal of Honor Allied Assault
1489 servers, 2960 players


13. Neverwinter Nights
786 servers, 2775 players


14. Soldier of Fortune 2
829 servers, 2740 players


15. Halo: Combat Evolved
892 servers, 2522 players


16. Unreal Tournament
1909 servers, 2458 players


17. Medal of Honor: Allied Assault Spearhead
938 servers, 2046 players


18. Halo Demo
390 servers, 1711 players


19. Battlefield 1942
672 servers, 1637 players


20. Red Orchestra Ostfront
215 servers, 1323 players


21. Battlefield Modern Combat (PS2)
97 servers, 1261 players


22. FEAR: First Encounter Assault Recon
778 servers, 1209 players


23. Star Wars Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy
624 servers, 1208 players


24. SWAT 4
320 servers, 1160 players


25. Unreal Tournament 3 Demo (PC)
477 servers, 1091 players


26. Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars
284 servers, 885 players


27. ArmA
495 servers, 884 players


28. Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth 2
252 servers, 816 players


29. NeverWinter Nights 2
209 servers, 753 players


30. Battlefield: Vietnam
254 servers, 622 players


31. Quake 4
464 servers, 618 players


32. Sniper Elite (PC)
121 servers, 598 players


33. Vietcong
175 servers, 570 players


34. Star Wars Battlefront 2 PC
187 servers, 525 players


35. Halo Multiplayer Expansion
224 servers, 514 players


36. Battlefield 2 Demo
48 servers, 481 players


37. Flight Simulator 2006
111 servers, 441 players


38. Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter 2
153 servers, 376 players


39. FlatOut 2 (PC)
108 servers, 374 players


40. Soldier of Fortune 2 Demo
75 servers, 334 players


Not sure about you but groups like Wine & Transgaming clearly see this as an untapped profitable market or they would'nt be developed as they are now?

cogadh
October 29th, 2007, 11:05 PM
Small community?

5 million active users playing "world of warcraft" Per Blizzard (say even only 4 million if they are indeed inflating there numbers)

Here are afew more stats that I find interesting to a very "small" community.

Source:http://archive.gamespy.com/stats/

Not sure about you but groups like Wine & Transgaming clearly see this as an untapped profitable market or they would'nt be developed as they are now?
Those are stats for all users, mostly Windows gamers, not just Linux gamers. In reality, the number of Linux gamers is a portion of the very small Linux community. There are no actual numbers on how many Linux users are gamers, but when you consider than Linux is less than 1% of the PC market and not everyone who uses Linux is a gamer, that is a very small community.

BTW - Wine is not just for gaming, it was originally a means of running Windows productivity apps on Linux, gaming was an afterthought. Also, Transgaming is not as big as you think and the majority of their business is currently coming from porting games to Mac, not Linux.

lespaul_rentals
October 30th, 2007, 09:03 PM
The "n00b" word aside, which I have a personal jihad against, I think Ubuntu has made clear that Linux is for everyone, even for the novice user. And I think you have a strange view of wine... For me it's essental to play the games I love and that I have fond memories from, not because I'm unwilling to learn - but because the other choice, to install/reboot into windows, is a choice I refuse to make.

I think you misinterpreted me. I meant to say that the only time wine is ever a problem is when someone is unwilling to learn. I'm all for wine and I think it's great, in fact I use it myself. I did not mean to say that wine is only used by noobs, I mean only noobs complain about wine (waaahh, why won't Half-Life 2 work on linucks).

maynoth
November 10th, 2007, 12:54 AM
When I can run battlefield 2142 under wine, then I will get rid of my windows partition.... More work and resources need to be dedicated to wine. If people could run more windows games, and quicken and other financial programs then linux would take off.

I can't switch people over do to this fact alone.

Mblackwell
November 10th, 2007, 08:20 AM
Actually the fact that I can't run Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines and haven't had much luck with Audio/Studio production tools on Linux (Jokosher is promising but not quite there yet, though Hydrogen Drum Machine is great for me (I use Fruity Loops on Windows)) is what keeps me booted into Windows these days. In fact, I'm on Windows right now although I hate to admit it. And it's really sad because I actually like using my Linux desktop better. It's nice and smooth and customized exactly how I want it with a nice work flow for most tasks.

Actually, the reasons are the above and this horrible horrible bug:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/147464

Edit: Also I think it's important to differentiate between people and what they want to work. You see, people want their programs and their computer to work. People might say "well Linux is not Windows" and this is true but that's not the problem. When people first boot into Linux it should detect their hardware and set things appropriately (Ubuntu currently does this for the most part), and the desktop should be mostly intuitive enough to use that a bit of poking around can help you figure it out (this is also true). The problem lies in the fact that people want certain things to work. If you've purchased and been working with certain pieces of software for a long time you'll probably want to continue to use them, or if not the program itself then at least documents associated with the program since you don't want all of your work over that time to become completely unusable. If it's a game you're going to want to be able to play that game. If you're someone who uses Photoshop a lot you're going to want to open those PSD files, and if you used word a lot you're going to want to continue to use DOCs or at least be able to open them. It doesn't matter to the user how it gets done as long as it gets done when they want it to be done. The first time they encounter a problem is when the trouble is going to start. And the harder the potential solution the harder it will be to keep someone as a Linux adopter.

The fact that Linux is not Windows and that the games were originally made for Windows doesn't matter to a gamer. They want to play the game... period. And it doesn't matter how they can play it, just as it doesn't matter to me how I get my songs recorded as long as I can get it done and get it done without a lot of frustration. If that means people have to use Windows again they will use Windows. And over time they might unfortunately just stop booting Linux or maybe even remove it because they're tired of having to go back and forth all of the time.

So when solutions for these issues arise we'll see more adopters. Although you don't want Linux to BECOME Windows it's important that it support to some degree a lot of the applications or, when applicable, alternatives to the applications that support the same file types.This is when you'll see more heavy adoption. I think this is really what "just works" means to the average user.

linuxlizard
November 11th, 2007, 08:15 AM
Computers are made to perform calculations, design and build, and increase productivity. Watching videos, playing games, browsing the web -- those are all side tasks.

LOL- yeah, see what you describe a computer as is fine for the office, but in the home I want a personal computer. Personal as in - the computer is made to do whatever I personally want it to do.

I've rode the home computing wave since the early 1980s when I got my first computer with money saved from my paper route - a commodore vic-20. This was followed by a commodore 64- the most popular computer ever made, and the computer that sold the most units ever (had about a 10 year run without upgrades to it's base cpu, memory, sound chip and operating system). Even way back then guess what most people bought the machines for? GAMES. And there were home video game machines on the market that were incredibly popular at the same time (atari 2600 and the first nintendo among others), yet commodore 64s sold left and right because people felt better about spending money on a computer that could be used as a tool as well as a game machine.

When amiga went belly up (first "modern" pc with a gui, full graphics, sound, multitasking, etc) I chose a winows 3.1/MSDOS box over a mac. I went with windows because of the games. I know for a fact from living through it with friends and stuff at the time that a lot of other amigans and commodore 64 fans went the same route for the same reasons.

So don't go talking smack like gaming doesn't have a significant place on a home computer. That's just bull- it's not historical, and it's contrary to the concept of personal computing, home computing, and the spirit of freedom inherent in linux- I was there man and am still here gaming on my linux machine over 20 years later. Linux has some great open source games over the past couple of years- a pretty nice list really, plus some that can be store bought and wined or native installed.

Computers aren't just about work. Thankfully everyone doesn't feel they are, or I would have given the hobby up long ago.

Side note- one of these years I'll bet the xbox or playstation is going to replace the personal computer- playstation with a full blown linux (as in not crippled like the one currently on the ps3) or xbox with full blown windows. If xbox does it, microsoft will have a huge monopoly. When it happens, we will have gone full circle back to the 80s where the hardware and software were tied together and the computer was plugged into the television.
:lolflag:.

Yfrwlf
November 30th, 2007, 12:02 AM
I still believe a large part of the problem could be solved by closing the gap between open source and closed source development by providing a system for end users and organizations to be able to put money into open source instead of closed source, allowing them to get the benefits of open source but to be able to directly fund the projects and to know what they're getting and where their money is going. One major benefit is that anything that is open source is of course easily portable for Linux, if it isn't created for Linux to begin with. The problem with closed source is that putting money into it is a lost cause to a degree, because it can't carry on in your favour, you won't be contributing to the never-ending life and development of some software, instead you will be throwing it away for a one-time solution.

Instead of paying for a one-time pass into an amusement park, you could be paying for some construction materials for a new amusement park, and if everyone who wanted to go to one did the same, you'd all have the power to make your own, and then use it for free, forever, with no restrictions.

I've been trying to get this project going for a while now, but a lack of interested parties and web developers is too impeding when you have a 1st life to attend to. Anyone know CSS/PHP? =/

fatality_uk
November 30th, 2007, 12:13 AM
There are some VERY cool "native" games on Linux. Alien Arena, Tremulous, sauerbraten, oh and er one other im playing with a linux client right now Enemy Territory Quake Wars :D
And im ASSURED that UT3 client is due any day.

Here's an interesting point. ETQW on my GF8800 WIN rig gets me 45+F.P.S On Ubuntu, usually 55+!!! Says something!

http://community.enemyterritory.com/index.php?q=node/180 check it out here

cogadh
November 30th, 2007, 07:52 AM
That's cause Linux doesn't have all those resource hogging services and background apps that Windows has. Which is why it really sucks that most commercial developers don't make Linux native games. Every game I have run on Linux, be it native or through Wine, has performed significantly better than on Windows. Linux would absolutely crush Windows as a gaming OS, if the commercial developers just gave us what we want.

fatality_uk
November 30th, 2007, 09:26 AM
That's cause Linux doesn't have all those resource hogging services and background apps that Windows has. Which is why it really sucks that most commercial developers don't make Linux native games. Every game I have run on Linux, be it native or through Wine, has performed significantly better than on Windows. Linux would absolutely crush Windows as a gaming OS, if the commercial developers just gave us what we want.

AMEN BRO!!! :-D:mrgreen:

MaximB
November 30th, 2007, 02:42 PM
I really dislike when Ubuntu fans talk about Ubuntu as it's were a separate OS from GNU/Linux.
If Ubuntu could do that, If Ubuntu could do this...man....
Say If GNU/Linux could do this...not Ubuntu.

hikaricore
November 30th, 2007, 03:19 PM
I really dislike when Ubuntu fans talk about Ubuntu as it's were a separate OS from GNU/Linux.
If Ubuntu could do that, If Ubuntu could do this...man....
Say If GNU/Linux could do this...not Ubuntu.

They don't know any better from what I've seen. :lolflag:

ukripper
November 30th, 2007, 04:56 PM
Blame ATI or nvidia and game devlopers rather than asking linux to do everything!

Joeb454
November 30th, 2007, 05:01 PM
I have to agree, it's not really Linux that's at fault, I mean, if dev's decide to port a game to Mac OS X, then why can't they port it to linux as well?

cogadh
November 30th, 2007, 05:07 PM
Because Mac OSX is not Linux, it is BSD, they are not really the same thing (but they are very similar). On top of that, there are way more Mac users than there are Linux users. Considering that game developers consider the Mac user base to be barely worth the expense required to port games to OSX, what do you think the Linux user base is worth to them?

Yfrwlf
November 30th, 2007, 05:46 PM
Because Mac OSX is not Linux, it is BSD, they are not really the same thing (but they are very similar). On top of that, there are way more Mac users than there are Linux users. Considering that game developers consider the Mac user base to be barely worth the expense required to port games to OSX, what do you think the Linux user base is worth to them?

I've heard that Linux has more use than Mac actually, and I think that's correct. Mac is expensive, and if you counted the number of desktops and servers in the whole world running Linux, I'll bet you it's a lot bigger than Mac, but that's just a guess.

And yes, porting to Linux if you've ported to Mac is quite simple to my knowledge since BSD is mostly the same.

cogadh
November 30th, 2007, 07:36 PM
I'm sorry, that's incorrect. Mac has about a 6% penetration into the PC market, while Linux has somewhere around 1 - 2% of the market, with Windows taking up the remaining 92 - 93 % of the market:
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2&qpmr=15&qpdt=1&qpct=3&qptimeframe=Y

You can not count Linux servers in those numbers, since those are not desktop machines used for gaming, e-mail, documents, etc. The server market is looked at as a completely separate market. In those terms, the numbers are very different, with Linux and Unix holding a far greater share of the market over Windows (Mac doesn't make a server).

As for porting, yes, BSD is very similar to Linux (but it is most definitely not the same), and it probably would be very easy to take a Mac port and make it into a Linux port, but why would they bother? There just aren't enough of us to warrant it.

stalkier
December 1st, 2007, 03:02 AM
I have no issues gaming on Ubuntu. I just finished playing Hl2: Episode 2 as it happens. Runs just as well as it did on my Windows setup and with out any issues I found.

Current games list:

Half-life 2 and Episodes 1 & 2 & Lost coast
Team Fortress 2
Portal
Garry's mod 10
Doom 3
Quake 4
Soldier of fortune
Homeworld 2 (wish i could find my home world 1 disc)
Stronghold
Darwinia
Defcon
Rail Road Tycoon 2
UFO: Alien invasion
Uplink
Unreal tournament (2003, 2004)

You try Oblivion yet?? I have been playing it on my Vista Ultimate platform for some time. Still one of my all time favs.

JSchoeck
December 1st, 2007, 01:37 PM
I'm so looking forward to building my next PC with Linux gaming in mind. Sure, I could already play Oblivion on Ubuntu on my Laptop, but I'm not so sure if there's really no performance hit (and since it's already 2.5 years old that wouldn't be appreciated).

Right now I must say that I've tried a few games from the Universe/Multiverse repositories (OpenArena, Nexuiz, some minor 2D games) and "low-end gamers" surely can have a lot of fun with those - especially because it is MUCH easier to find games here than free non-ad-spamming games on Windows. Although the FPS games didn't run too well for me yet.

In a few month my new machine will be done and I'm so gonna vote for Linux with my wallet!

PS: Did anyone try Civ4 BtS on Ubuntu yet? I guess it should work fine on Wine, but I haven't tried yet.

hikaricore
December 1st, 2007, 01:59 PM
PS: Did anyone try Civ4 BtS on Ubuntu yet? I guess it should work fine on Wine, but I haven't tried yet.

http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=9501

KhaaL
December 1st, 2007, 03:39 PM
BTS works fine, in addition to the DLLs civ4 vanilla needs you also need to copy over mscoree and msvcp71 to your system32 folder in wine.

Keep an eye on that space that hikaricore posted, I'll post a report and a few troubleshooting steps that occur with Civ4 & BTS once my maintainer application is approved.

Spiritlance
December 1st, 2007, 06:29 PM
Behind every game is a graphics engine.If it would be worthwhile to include a wine/Ubuntu friendly renderer it would expand the market.A game called Fury runs both the Unreal engine and a low end renderer.Not sure if the game is doing well but it is a sound idea.

hikaricore
December 1st, 2007, 09:04 PM
OpenGL would be what you were looking for there lance.

And Ubuntu is Linux, it's not some crazy new OS that games have to be written for specifically.

JusticeZero
December 4th, 2007, 10:22 PM
I particularly get annoyed at people who idolize the CLI claiming that it's more powerful. A CLI is not more powerful. You can only affect a program in the ways the program is designed to accept input in. If you load it with command options, it will be effective in CLI, but you can just as easily flake on the command line options but build a robust GUI with more options than the CLI offers.
Recently went looking for RPG games (not MMO - stuff like Final Fantasy, Fallout, et al). I had a very hard time finding anything that had graphics equal to, let alone better than, the original 8-bit NES Legend of Zelda. Pretty much the only things I could find were web games in Flash, or NWN. For crying out loud. I wanted to make a software company to make one, except my background isn't computers.

matthewcraig
December 5th, 2007, 02:20 AM
JusticeZero: There are many game engines available so you can make your own RPG without needing to program the whole thing. Don't feel like you can't make your own applications, just because you don't have a PhD in computer science.

hikaricore
December 5th, 2007, 02:42 AM
Please don't feed the troll. ^_^

JusticeZero
December 5th, 2007, 04:06 AM
Sure, but the ones I saw? Sub-Zelda graphics, mostly. I don't mind kicking it old-school, but not THAT old-school. Sure, there are some nice FPSes and such, but I don't like those games.
I think the question might need to be "Why CAN'T we get games?" Is it because larger games need to be done in a less democratic fashion in order to get the content into them that is demanded from 12 year old games within the build time?

matthewcraig
December 5th, 2007, 04:41 AM
Hmm... maybe you are trolling. There are lots of awesome games available for Linux. You can see this through a quick look through this forum. I was ready to agree with you about the specific lack of RPGs available, but now you're onto "why we can't get games" and you've lost me.

matthewcraig
December 5th, 2007, 05:10 AM
This article just got published today, talking about why some vendors choose not to support Linux solutions.
http://handyfloss.wordpress.com/2007/12/04/vendor-lock-in-for-dummies/

ukripper
December 5th, 2007, 11:27 AM
I particularly get annoyed at people who idolize the CLI claiming that it's more powerful. A CLI is not more powerful. You can only affect a program in the ways the program is designed to accept input in. If you load it with command options, it will be effective in CLI, but you can just as easily flake on the command line options but build a robust GUI with more options than the CLI offers.
Recently went looking for RPG games (not MMO - stuff like Final Fantasy, Fallout, et al). I had a very hard time finding anything that had graphics equal to, let alone better than, the original 8-bit NES Legend of Zelda. Pretty much the only things I could find were web games in Flash, or NWN. For crying out loud. I wanted to make a software company to make one, except my background isn't computers.

GUI takes more resources and in CLI everything is centralised - (the way I prefer.) Just few commands for any apps, packages, administration, remote login, ftp, copying files local/remotely, Backing up just everything I need is quicker with CLI. CLI is power in your hands should exploit it.

Yfrwlf
December 5th, 2007, 05:47 PM
GUI takes more resources and in CLI everything is centralised - (the way I prefer.) Just few commands for any apps, packages, administration, remote login, ftp, copying files local/remotely, Backing up just everything I need is quicker with CLI. CLI is power in your hands should exploit it.

You're right that if you're talking about speed, and what's currently available now on the CLI vs. GUI, the CLI has many more features and is indeed faster once you've learned it. Otherwise, their point was valid, that the GUI can have as many features as the CLI, it's just that it usually doesn't, but slowly more GUI versions of the command line programs are created. Ideally, for most things, it'd be cool if there was a GUI equivalent, certainly wouldn't hurt, though most of such things should be in an "advanced" section if so, because a lot of the CLI commands do powerful things that normal users don't need.

Yfrwlf
December 5th, 2007, 05:58 PM
Sure, but the ones I saw? Sub-Zelda graphics, mostly. I don't mind kicking it old-school, but not THAT old-school. Sure, there are some nice FPSes and such, but I don't like those games.
I think the question might need to be "Why CAN'T we get games?" Is it because larger games need to be done in a less democratic fashion in order to get the content into them that is demanded from 12 year old games within the build time?

It's not so much Linux vs. Windows that you're battling, but also remember that it's open source vs. closed source. There are some open source games that are pretty decent, but lots of funding is put into some commercial games and their development is often more rapid. Windows is the main gaming platform, so these games are usually created for it instead of Linux. The article craigmatthew I mean matthewcraig (yes, I got the reference) posted is a good summation of the catch-22 Linux faces. Windows must really suck and/or Linux must be really good in order for the vendor lock-in cycle to be broken. So, switching is good, that helps, because the more Linux users there are, the more pressure the catch-22 faces, and the better you can make Linux and the apps for it the more that will help too.

Also, unbundling Windows from new computers would *really* help.

But any way, you're right, there needs to be more games for Linux, and there are a few more and I think it's increasing but it's unfortunately a slow process and of course it won't get to the level that Windows is at for several more years unless there's a harder push or some breaking points are reached.

cudds
December 5th, 2007, 06:25 PM
I have no issues gaming on Ubuntu. I just finished playing Hl2: Episode 2 as it happens. Runs just as well as it did on my Windows setup and with out any issues I found.

Current games list:

Half-life 2 and Episodes 1 & 2 & Lost coast
Team Fortress 2
Portal
Garry's mod 10
Doom 3
Quake 4
Soldier of fortune
Homeworld 2 (wish i could find my home world 1 disc)
Stronghold
Darwinia
Defcon
Rail Road Tycoon 2
UFO: Alien invasion
Uplink
Unreal tournament (2003, 2004)

So all these games run natively in Linux?!!! I've been playing Enemy Territorial: Quake and think it's amazing - does this mean counter strike is native?

cogadh
December 5th, 2007, 06:52 PM
No, most of them run with Wine, not really "natively".

Gadren
December 7th, 2007, 01:31 AM
There have been interesting points on both sides in this thread, but I think it's very important to point out that games aren't quite like other programs when it comes to Linux alternatives. While we can say, "You need a wallpaper switcher? Here's one in Linux!" or "Try out this spreadsheet program -- it's a lot like Excel!", it doesn't work the same for games.

When people like a game, they usually like that game. For example, one of the few things keeping me dual-booting is the game Rise of Nations, whose LAN games won't work in Wine. Simply saying that there are other RTS games made for Linux simply doesn't work, because it's the properties of this specific game, and the fact that I play this specific game with my roommates, that makes it irreplaceable.

It's a little bit like the new Blu-Ray and HD-DVD battle. If there's one movie that's only on Blu-Ray, pointing out how many similar movies are on HD-DVD doesn't work, because creative and entertainment works have their value strongly tied to the specific work it is.

Zeenomorph
December 8th, 2007, 09:46 AM
I've loved reading this thread and wanted to add my 2 cents.

Gaming is my primary reason for owning a PC. It took until the release of Vista for my hatred of Microsoft to exceed my love of playing the new and "Shiney" games. I understand that there are some games working on Linux (WoW, the Orange Box, and Quake Wars) but when StarCraft 2 comes out, or WarHammer Online, Supreme Commander, or Crysis, I won't be able to head down to the store buy the disk and play. This, and this alone is the only reason Windows will have any place on my computer whatsoever.

I do believe that the only solution to this problem is voting with your pocketbook. I have every intention of getting Quake Wars, not because I like Quake, but because of the Linux support. I will also purchase my next computer from a Linux vendor such as
https://system76.authsecure.com/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=56

It's up to all of us to make this wonderful Linux community to be exactly what we want. If you feel that something needs to change, it is up to all of us to work together to move closer to that goal. We are only going to get better -- the future of Linux gaming looks bright.

Yfrwlf
December 8th, 2007, 09:51 AM
There have been interesting points on both sides in this thread, but I think it's very important to point out that games aren't quite like other programs when it comes to Linux alternatives. While we can say, "You need a wallpaper switcher? Here's one in Linux!" or "Try out this spreadsheet program -- it's a lot like Excel!", it doesn't work the same for games.

When people like a game, they usually like that game. For example, one of the few things keeping me dual-booting is the game Rise of Nations, whose LAN games won't work in Wine. Simply saying that there are other RTS games made for Linux simply doesn't work, because it's the properties of this specific game, and the fact that I play this specific game with my roommates, that makes it irreplaceable.

It's a little bit like the new Blu-Ray and HD-DVD battle. If there's one movie that's only on Blu-Ray, pointing out how many similar movies are on HD-DVD doesn't work, because creative and entertainment works have their value strongly tied to the specific work it is.

Quite right, well why does anyone go back to old games? Because they like them. I use DOSBox, and SNES and NES emulators, etc, because there are certain games I still enjoy. Wine is a pretty amazing at playing several Windows games, but certainly doesn't play them all like you've said. I'm sure in the future we'll still come back to rehash our favorite old Windows-only games in much the same way, but hopefully by then there will be more Linux games.

...I still think funding open source games is one of the key solutions though. >.<

Yfrwlf
December 8th, 2007, 10:00 AM
I do believe that the only solution to this problem is voting with your pocketbook. I have every intention of getting Quake Wars, not because I like Quake, but because of the Linux support. I will also purchase my next computer from a Linux vendor such as
https://system76.authsecure.com/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=56

It's up to all of us to make this wonderful Linux community to be exactly what we want. If you feel that something needs to change, it is up to all of us to work together to move closer to that goal. We are only going to get better -- the future of Linux gaming looks bright.

It helps to vote that way sure, though I'm disappointed in their lack of advertising or mention of support for Linux whatsoever, and the lack of it's inclusion in the box. Otherwise, you *could* go pick it up, pop it in, and play.

Open source games on Linux will improve and especially as new easier ways of creating games improve (game creation studios, etc), but if I was standing in Gamestop and had the choice between Quake Wars Open Freedom License, and Quake Wars Closed Source Proprietary Controlling License, I would pick the one that is "unlocked" and is easily modifiable because it would be so much more powerful and better. There would be more mods, more community involvement, more everything, and I wouldn't be at all restricted. Problem is, how would I pay for it? That's the problem with open source, is aside from paid support and donations among other ways, there isn't an easy way to vote with your wallet and know that all the developers are getting financial support for doing what they are doing. I think it would be a helpful ingredient to add into the mix to help propel FOSS/FLOSS/whatever software more rapidly.

LukeCarrier
December 8th, 2007, 10:05 AM
Hello everybody,

I completely agree with you. I wish game developers would see how much better a platform Linux is than Windows. I'm not bashing Windows here, but I just think it sucks up way too much memory for mediocre graphics that could be achieved by running Compiz Fusion on a Pentium 2 with 128MB RAM.

Ubuntu certainly has the productivity software and is a fantastic choice for schools and businesses. However, gamers are being left out, and it's the developers fault. I don't see how we can change this though, I think Microsoft need to come out with more bum releases like Vista before we see something change :lolflag:.

--Luke

KhaaL
December 8th, 2007, 12:32 PM
I do believe that the only solution to this problem is voting with your pocketbook. I have every intention of getting Quake Wars, not because I like Quake, but because of the Linux support.


The linux users who are gamers is really a small precentage I think. We're like 5% or less of the total PC gamers. Linux gaming needs more than just monetary voting and funding - It needs a engaged game company like ID that wholeheartedly supports linux. It needs people keeping on developing top-notch FOSS games actively. But what I think would help most is if the Linux gamers would have a Mark Shuttlework person to represent them and drive the cause forward and take initiatives like Free Ryzom (http://www.ryzom.org/donation/new).

I'm hoping for a brighter linux gaming future, but I think that we'll only get it from ID, wine developers and mods made for ET:QW and UT3.

subs
December 8th, 2007, 12:35 PM
if u want to run windows games.... just install vmbox.... and run a virtual windows to play games.... except that.... windows has pretty much no use at all!!!

KhaaL
December 8th, 2007, 12:39 PM
You seem to forgot that virtual machines provide no 3D acceleration at all. In this aspect you're better off with wine.

Yfrwlf
December 8th, 2007, 08:04 PM
But what I think would help most is if the Linux gamers would have a Mark Shuttlework person to represent them and drive the cause forward and take initiatives like Free Ryzom (http://www.ryzom.org/donation/new).

That's exactly what I'm talking about. They only accept "donations", so there is no accountability if they don't produce what they hoped to or promised to. There needs to be a system involving more security for both parties.

Yfrwlf
December 8th, 2007, 08:06 PM
if u want to run windows games.... just install vmbox.... and run a virtual windows to play games.... except that.... windows has pretty much no use at all!!!

The only VM software that supports 3D acceleration that I know of is the new versions of VMWare, and it's not fully supported in them, lots of effects aren't functioning, but many are. What is working is pretty impressive for virtualization.

hikaricore
December 8th, 2007, 08:29 PM
But what I think would help most is if the Linux gamers would have a Mark Shuttlework person to represent them and drive the cause forward and take initiatives like Free Ryzom (http://www.ryzom.org/donation/new).

You spelled Shuttleworth wrong...

cogadh
December 8th, 2007, 09:07 PM
The only VM software that supports 3D acceleration that I know of is the new versions of VMWare, and it's not fully supported in them, lots of effects aren't functioning, but many are. What is working is pretty impressive for virtualization.
That's only with VMWare Fusion, which only works on Mac OSX right now. Currently there are no VM solutions for Linux that provide 3D acceleration.

diaz028
December 8th, 2007, 10:18 PM
My understanding is to create games on Open GL, and have separate windows and Linux installers.

Other than that, OpenGL is useable under windows and linux. So if programmers start to really hate DX10, and prefer OpenGL 4.0, then Linux would see much more gaming. I know OpenGL is a bit more complex, but it is very powerful and would reach the Linux market, like Doom/Unreal/Quake/HalfLife did.

-D

bluedragon436
December 8th, 2007, 10:20 PM
I have for the most part converted completely over to Ubutnu...I have one desktop still running Dual boot with Windows...only for gaming....other than that I use Ubuntu for everything else I need to do....

hikaricore
December 8th, 2007, 10:33 PM
My understanding is to create games on Open GL, and have separate windows and Linux installers.

Other than that, OpenGL is useable under windows and linux.

It works in concept but game developers don't much give a damn about us.



So if programmers start to really hate DX10, and prefer OpenGL 4.0, then Linux would see much more gaming.

There's no such thing as OpenGL 4.0.. 3.0 is currently awaiting release. ^_^



I know OpenGL is a bit more complex, but...

No it's not, it's just not being shoved down people's throats by Microsoft like DirectX is.

Yfrwlf
December 9th, 2007, 01:30 AM
That's only with VMWare Fusion, which only works on Mac OSX right now. Currently there are no VM solutions for Linux that provide 3D acceleration.

VMWare Workstation 6 provides hardware graphics acceleration. I know, because I played Max Payne 2 in XP on it within Linux.


No it's not, it's just not being shoved down people's throats by Microsoft like DirectX is.

Right, and the Xbox 360 doesn't "support" OpenGL 2.0 (since it's not installed) for obvious reasons. A good example of this is UT3, which to my knowledge was normally created in OpenGL primarily but now it's been reversed and it is made in DX fpr Vista and the 360, while Linux and OpenGL have been given a back seat.

cogadh
December 9th, 2007, 01:41 AM
It does not provide hardware acceleration, DirectX is doing software emulation within the virtual machine, since the VM does not provide a hardware accelerated device. From the VMWare knowledgebase for VMWare Workstation 6:


Are 3-D graphics and 3-D applications (DirectX) supported by VMware?

Windows can emulate Direct3D support for a device that does not support hardware acceleration, (such as VMware's virtual SVGA adapter), but most 3-D capable graphics applications will run very slowly, or not at all, in this condition. Thus, a virtual machine that tries to run a 3-D capable graphics application in software emulation mode will run very slowly, at best.

VMWare Fusion actually provides true hardware accelerated graphics, but without pixel shader support. Eventually the experimental support that is currently in Fusion may be included in the Linux offerings, but it is no where near that point yet.

Yfrwlf
December 9th, 2007, 02:04 AM
It does not provide hardware acceleration, DirectX is doing software emulation within the virtual machine, since the VM does not provide a hardware accelerated device.

It was not software emulation, I highly doubt, because I got extremely fluid framerates for Max Payne 2. I got it working, using VMWare Workstation 6 beta. If they took this feature out, then so be it, but I know what I saw (and played), so now you've gotten me curious to try it again and document exactly how to do it once I have a free moment.

cogadh
December 9th, 2007, 03:45 AM
If you have the hardware to do it (RAM, processor), the DX software emulated acceleration can work quite well in some cases. Max Payne 2 doesn't really require that much of machine (by today's standards), so I wouldn't be surprised if you could get pretty good framerates on a VM, as long as you have allocated enough of your system's resources to the VM.

ninecrosses
December 9th, 2007, 07:07 AM
Well, let me get on my soap box for a little bit here. Back awhile ago I was big in the TechTV show before it became G4TV and I forgot what it was I watched, but it was a computer show. They talked about some hacker game, so I downloaded and played it. Probably was thirteen at the time. But really like it, watched Swordfish, and then wanted to be a hacker.

Started learning everything I could, how to use command, telnet, Jack the Ripper, and scanning ports (too much to use at my age). Became familiar with Python, Dev C/C++, Pearl, Ruby, Java. Made game engines, and every Windows command known (what it felt like) and started making and playing simple/mild games. I strayed from wanting to crack computers to make games.

As of now, I made the transfer to Ubuntu/Linux, from Windows and at first was very upset with it. But after a few days I've gotten really used to it and really enjoying Ubuntu. I now Dual boot and currently working with an emulator to play Xbox/Xbox 360 games on Linux and Windows. I've got my favorite games - Forza Motorsport and Forza Motorsport 2 working in my emulator and can not be happier. As soon as I start working the bugs out to make user-friendly and not me-friendly. I plan on releasing it. So far runs smooth and with out problems. Graphics are great.

Yfrwlf
December 9th, 2007, 05:26 PM
As of now, I made the transfer to Ubuntu/Linux, from Windows and at first was very upset with it. But after a few days I've gotten really used to it and really enjoying Ubuntu. I now Dual boot and currently working with an emulator to play Xbox/Xbox 360 games on Linux and Windows. I've got my favorite games - Forza Motorsport and Forza Motorsport 2 working in my emulator and can not be happier. As soon as I start working the bugs out to make user-friendly and not me-friendly. I plan on releasing it. So far runs smooth and with out problems. Graphics are great.

Oooookay, well if what you say is actually true, then you'd basically be running Wine or a VM, because from what I know about the Xbox it's just Windows basically. So, for you to program something that can emulate what is basically a Windows system, and do it well, and have compatibility with games, would be amazing unless you didn't start from scratch. I'll see it when I believe it. Release it then already. :)

ebichu
December 9th, 2007, 05:32 PM
It does not provide hardware acceleration, DirectX is doing software emulation within the virtual machine, since the VM does not provide a hardware accelerated device. From the VMWare knowledgebase for VMWare Workstation 6:



VMWare Fusion actually provides true hardware accelerated graphics, but without pixel shader support. Eventually the experimental support that is currently in Fusion may be included in the Linux offerings, but it is no where near that point yet.
http://www.vmware.com/support/ws5/doc/ws_vidsound_d3d_enabling_vm.html

KhaaL
December 9th, 2007, 05:36 PM
@ebichu

Thank only work with DX7 or DX8 games... dosen't work with DX9 or newer.

CideRed
December 9th, 2007, 05:40 PM
I guess I'm in a pretty small minority in that I came to linux to play games! Well not so much games plural as a game in particular, I'm beta testing for X3 Reunion on linux.

Linux (specifically Ubuntu) does everything else that I need but I had to have one final reason to make the move permanent. Without X3 I wouldn't have done it. So in my case, gaming made the difference. Now, having used Ubuntu for four weeks, I can honestly say that it has exceeded any expectations I had, although it has been hard going at times.

The linux experience on it's own isn't enough to tempt many, give them a gaming reason to change and I expect they would. Will this please the purists? I doubt it. Is Canonical et al bothered? I wouldn't think so. Are games publishers frothing at the mouth? Hell no.

The answer is? Damned if I know.

cogadh
December 9th, 2007, 05:55 PM
http://www.vmware.com/support/ws5/doc/ws_vidsound_d3d_enabling_vm.html

My understanding is that only really works correctly if the host system is a Windows system, not a Linux system. I could be wrong about that and if I am, I sit corrected. However, 3D acceleration in anything other than Fusion is still only in early experimental stages, even VMWare says don't expect it to work and don't use it in a production environment.

EDIT - Apparently I need to type faster (never start a reply, then go looking at nine other things before finishing), Khaal already partially debunked this. Oh, and I do sit corrected, at least in regards to older games.

ebichu
December 9th, 2007, 07:44 PM
yep, 3d acceleration "works" in linux too, tho it does not have dx9 support. also, vmware kind of software should not be used for gaming, at least for now, until virtual machines don't have direct access to hardware.

ninecrosses
December 10th, 2007, 07:07 AM
Oooookay, well if what you say is actually true, then you'd basically be running Wine or a VM, because from what I know about the Xbox it's just Windows basically. So, for you to program something that can emulate what is basically a Windows system, and do it well, and have compatibility with games, would be amazing unless you didn't start from scratch. I'll see it when I believe it. Release it then already. :)

Not all true. True that X-BOX is similar to Windows. But the code, after extracting it from the CD, is easily manipulative. The reason many emulators are only for one game or so is:

It's the only way to distribute a 'legal' program.

My emulator works by:
1. Extracting the encoded files from the CD to my computer
2. Force opening the files to edit.
3. Altering the code and ridding windows type libs/srcs/etc... to Linux friendly.
4. At the end, compiling to run to the emulator I've compiled.

A few draw backs are:
1.It's illegal for some reason (I e-mailed X-BOX and asked them about it) and they wouldn't give me an answer besides being illegal.
2.Takes up space on your computer because I haven't gotten a CD running application yet besides from Halo.

I'm working to make it more user-friendly, play from a CD, and 'legal'. Which is why many emulators are not available. And even talking about the program could perhaps, get me some criminal charges. Which would **** me off since I've bought countless X-Box's and Play-Station 2's that keep frying out their CD drives. And the only way to enjoyably play the games is to use my computer.

thecapuchin
December 10th, 2007, 08:06 AM
Ok, I've taken the time to read through this entire thread and I feel like I should add my thoughts to this. I don't have stats or numbers or anything hard and fast to add, so my opinion is what you're stuck with.

A little over a year ago, I started working with a company that used Linux primarily and that encouraged me to get off my lazy *** and actually install and learn to use Linux effectively. I look back now and wonder why it took me so long to ditch Winblows. Don't get me wrong, if I were into playing the new, hot games that just hit the market, I would likely have to install them on a Winblows machine due to the fact that the Linux community can't keep up and find and create workarounds to play them under Cedega/Wine.

The only remaining Winblows machine I have is my laptop, which currently dual boots XP and Mint 4.0. I keep the NTFS partition there because the ATI card in the damn thing is a bitch and a half to get working in Mint.

So when it comes down to it, I love Ubuntu for almost everything and would purge Microsoft from my PCs in a heartbeat if the gaming situation under Linux got to the point where everything worked out of the box with little to no tweaking.

Ok, rambling over. You can go about your business now that I've finished wasting your time.

MNICY
December 10th, 2007, 09:04 AM
Unreal Tournament 3

Yfrwlf
December 11th, 2007, 07:28 PM
1.It's illegal for some reason (I e-mailed X-BOX and asked them about it) and they wouldn't give me an answer besides being illegal.

It's illegal because they don't want you to, and what they say goes. Geez, what did you think you were living in, a place with freedoms?


My emulator works by:
1. Extracting the encoded files from the CD to my computer
2. Force opening the files to edit.
3. Altering the code and ridding windows type libs/srcs/etc... to Linux friendly.
4. At the end, compiling to run to the emulator I've compiled.

You may be completely lying and trying to be funny, but I honestly don't know because I don't understand how it all works to begin with, but all I know is that porting a game to Linux is supposed to take a lot longer than the short time you seem to be talking about, so what's the difference? You're talking about an emulator, and then talking about recompiling something. Why would you have to recompile an emulator for a certain game? Most emulators emulate entire systems so they run many different games...

Any way, Wine has Windows DLLs that programs need to access to run, and it's not just a simple matter of redirecting them to Linux equivalents, because there are none, only the Wine DLLs, so the only way to get around that would be to recompile the game from source code, and the Xbox games don't come with source code. :P So, you're confusing, but I don't totally understand how it all works to begin with so I'm easily confused. >.<


So when it comes down to it, I love Ubuntu for almost everything and would purge Microsoft from my PCs in a heartbeat if the gaming situation under Linux got to the point where everything worked out of the box with little to no tweaking.

I have no problem, I'm running Wine 1.0, what version do you have?

Yes, I'm kidding. :P

Either works out of the box, or quite simply there are more ports made to Linux, and more Linux games made for Linux. ;) Or how about all three....but mostly that last one. Never fear though! Once Linux is used for most everything but games (well, and some games, too), there will be no point in game companies not making games for anything else. They'll just be like, oh-my-god, lets just make our games for what everyone is using, GOSH. IDIOTS. Just too bad that it's a slow process. It's up to YOU to help make it faster. ;)

SaturN-101
December 11th, 2007, 10:42 PM
Umm, I don't know if this site has been mentioned, or if it is even relevant, but I have just this moment (while reading this thread) see this site
Tux games (http://www.tuxgames.com/browse.cgi?&referrer=mandrake.tips&category=all)
This seems to be a list of games available to play on Linux.

cogadh
December 12th, 2007, 12:34 AM
Unfortunately, with only a few exceptions, all of those are relatively old games. While it is great that you can buy and play all of them on Linux, it's not the same when you are playing 2 - 3 year old games while all the Windows users are playing BioShock, Crysis, Assassin's Creed, etc.

b1z0
December 12th, 2007, 01:57 AM
I switched to ubuntu a few weeks ago (My friend tried to dual boot, but ended up just wiping the hard drive lol) and I got up wow running in almost the same time it took me to get it running on vista, as well as enemy territory quake wars. All I had to do was read..

.Maybe the ppl you are trying to refer to are lazy users that don't really want to do leg work, which is understandable to the gamer that has the mentality of "put cd in, install, press play" I was the same way. I have found out with linux is that you learn stuff. I've learned more stuff about computers in general than I have when I was a windows user

Well, to make a long story longer, all that I had to do was google something I wanted to happen and not too long after that, ubuntu does its thing! These forums have proven to be worth their weight in gold (If bytes could be measured in the metric system =P)

sloggerkhan
December 12th, 2007, 02:12 AM
I think the game thing is one of those chicken and egg questions.
Developer: I won't develop games for linux until there are users to buy them.
Gamer: I won't use linux until there are games to buy for it.

sirdilznik
December 12th, 2007, 04:45 AM
I game on Linux, exclusively on Linux, and I love it. There are tons of great free games. Some may not have "killer graphics" or effects, but in the grand scheme of things graphics and effects take a backseat to game play and fun factor. Also I have plenty of great native commercial games. NWN, UT2k4, UT2k3, Doom3, Quake4, RTCW,

But more important than any of that, I can play TES4:Oblivion (one of the greatest games ever made IMHO) via emulation (yeah, yeah, it's NOT an emulator) and the game runs awesome, stable, and blazin' fast, :mrgreen:

That's more than good enough for me.

cogadh
December 12th, 2007, 05:19 AM
If you know its not an emulator, they why use the words "via emulation"?

omega_user
December 12th, 2007, 05:31 AM
The problem with Linux gaming is that the mainstream masses don't want to have to enter a single command line string. That seems to be the biggest downer.

How'd u get Doom3 working in Ubuntu? That sounds beast. I've been thinking about getting the newest Quake Wars which runs linux natively and is incredible. The demo is very fun and I'd recommend it to anyone.

WINE too is a great pro for linux gaming. I think I read something recently where the new Team Fortress 2 works perfectly in WINE.

Either way, I hope Ubuntu can become more gamer friendly and kick MS right out of the pciture

sirdilznik
December 12th, 2007, 06:43 AM
If you know its not an emulator, they why use the words "via emulation"?

Because I always think of wine (or cedega) as an emulator and refer to it as such because it provides me with the same functionality as an emulator. Technically though, I guess it is not an emulator since it provides the actual APIs needes and so on (the technical part is mostly over my head). In fact WINE stands for Wine Is Not an Emulator (silly programmer humor) which also points to the fact that wine won't (or shouldn't) give you a performance hit. It's a technicality for zealots to argue over. Kind of like GNU zealots with the "It's not Linux, it's GNU/Linux " stuff.

Edit: "via emulation" was the quickest, easiest way I could think of to convey that the game was not native to Linux, but able to run in Linux (with help).

sirdilznik
December 12th, 2007, 06:55 AM
How'd u get Doom3 working in Ubuntu? That sounds beast.There is a native Linux client for Doom3. There really isn't much to getting it to work. And yes it is beast, though the "Monster jumping out of the closet" trick gets real old real fast.

Here (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Doom3) is a Howto. It's very straight forward.

wild_oscar
December 12th, 2007, 11:26 AM
And if you want the dynamic to change, to start the process of getting more games available in linux, what needs to happen is a killer-app. A game for linux (and only linux) that everyone wants to play.

Because then you'll start getting windows users setting up dual-boot systems and starting to use linux. Then game developers will know they can develop for either platform without penalty. Then it'll be less risky to develop linux-only games.

Why would someone develop a game for a small minority? And why would someone develop a game for Ubuntu when Ubuntu is slower than Windows XP?

KhaaL
December 12th, 2007, 11:39 AM
Developing for ubuntu (or for linux in general) is not developing for a minority. You'd be using open standards thus your game can be run on far more systems than only windows (Mac and PS3 both use OpenGL).

Ubuntu slower than XP? depends on what you're comparing. I have a slightly longer boot time, but the performance is faster than XP by far. And ubuntu beats windows in more areas than only speed.

Yfrwlf
December 12th, 2007, 11:46 AM
I switched to ubuntu a few weeks ago (My friend tried to dual boot, but ended up just wiping the hard drive lol) and I got up wow running in almost the same time it took me to get it running on vista, as well as enemy territory quake wars. All I had to do was read..

.Maybe the ppl you are trying to refer to are lazy users that don't really want to do leg work, which is understandable to the gamer that has the mentality of "put cd in, install, press play" I was the same way. I have found out with linux is that you learn stuff. I've learned more stuff about computers in general than I have when I was a windows user

Well, to make a long story longer, all that I had to do was google something I wanted to happen and not too long after that, ubuntu does its thing! These forums have proven to be worth their weight in gold (If bytes could be measured in the metric system =P)

The point is that most gamers just want to game, not learn to use a new OS. While learning Linux is certainly fun to some, it should not be required, and most gamers are not computer geeks. You're right though, that right now with Linux gaming, if more would learn how, there would be more Linux gamers, but there'd also be more gamers if Linux had more native games for it that you could just put the CD/DVD in and click install/play.


I game on Linux, exclusively on Linux, and I love it. There are tons of great free games. Some may not have "killer graphics" or effects, but in the grand scheme of things graphics and effects take a backseat to game play and fun factor. Also I have plenty of great native commercial games. NWN, UT2k4, UT2k3, Doom3, Quake4, RTCW,

But more important than any of that, I can play TES4:Oblivion (one of the greatest games ever made IMHO) via emulation (yeah, yeah, it's NOT an emulator) and the game runs awesome, stable, and blazin' fast, :mrgreen:

That's more than good enough for me.

Good, enjoy gaming for those games, and show others them as well, but you can't expect everyone to know how or be as enthusiastic about doing lots of crap to get something to run as you do. Most gamers even prefer consoles over Windows and Linux, because it's something that you truly simply have to stick something in and it just works. That's what gamers want. If Linux can provide that, more will switch, but for now you have to be a bit hard-nosed to switch to Linux for gaming aside from the open source ones available in repositories. For those games, Linux IS easier than Windows gaming, but the selection is no where what it is on other platforms yet of course. YET!

weblordpepe
December 12th, 2007, 03:30 PM
I think a bunch of people here have missed the boat.
The operating system isn't an issue. Its what APIs are used.

There are many games which are cross-platform. For example Doom3, Penumbra, Quake3/4/Wars and many others.

The key is which API is used. Eg OpenGL instead of Direct3D. If you use open APIs, you can compile for almost any platform. This is where developers need to focus.

Microsoft pushes 'Games for Windows' very strongly. They want developers using their development tools, which coincidentally use DirectX and only run on Windows.

The first poster of this thread is correct. If 'gaming is possible on linux' then it will take off. By far, games is the biggest obstacle for people avoiding linux. Second-place is specific-applications, third place is hardware support.

There is room for Linux and free operating systems like GNU:
Gamers love to tweak. They love to brag & think they are good tweakers. Well, Linux is all tweak. If big games come out for Linux, suddenly you get flame-wars about the best distro for gaming, and gamers will start bragging about their Linux skills.

The 'not many people use linux' excuse is not valid, because its not the operating system which is the issue for developers. Its also not valid because there is no stats on linux use. The whole '1% of users' thing is a bit of a identity crisis if anything and is a self-forfilling prophecy.

Also, games do not have to be open-source.
There is no real conflict of issues when it comes to developing on linux. Linux might be open, but there are plenty of companies which write proprietary software that runs on top of linux.

Remember kids: Freedom includes the freedom not to share. To expect all newbies to embrace any kind of ideals ('make your software free or else') is a barrier to adoption. Let developers contribute code to the community later, and let them contribute by bringing gamers to the community now.

cogadh
December 12th, 2007, 04:08 PM
Why would someone develop a game for a small minority? And why would someone develop a game for Ubuntu when Ubuntu is slower than Windows XP?

Wh-what!? Slower than XP!? Maybe on your system, my friend, but for most everyone else, any Linux system blows any Windows system out of the water in terms of speed. Linux doesn't have any of those nasty resource hogging system services that Windows has, plus, you don't really have to run additional resource hogs like antivirus or antispyware on Linux. Linux as a gaming platform would absolutely own Windows in the performance area, if the games were there. That's why Sony chose Linux as the core of both the PS2 and PS3 operating systems, they knew it could provide the necessary power to run the games, but also be light enough to not make the hardware struggle.


The point is that most gamers just want to game, not learn to use a new OS. While learning Linux is certainly fun to some, it should not be required, and most gamers are not computer geeks. You're right though, that right now with Linux gaming, if more would learn how, there would be more Linux gamers, but there'd also be more gamers if Linux had more native games for it that you could just put the CD/DVD in and click install/play.
Your assuming that people even bothered to learn to use their existing OS. Part of the problem with the "insert CD, click play" functionality of Windows is that it has created entire generations of computer users who don't know the first thing about actually using a computer. To use the car analogy so often used in PC discussions; you need to learn to drive a car before you are allowed to drive one, but any idiot can turn on a computer. I don't think everyone should know how to build a PC or replace parts (that's why cars have mechanics), but at the very least every PC user should know their OS well enough to maintain it (get the oil changed, remember to fill that gas tank, etc.). Windows has created a world where far too many people don't know how to do that. I spend a lot of time on other gaming forums and it always makes me cringe when someone asks "How do I update my video drivers?". Do you take your car to the mechanic because you don't know how to set the clock on the radio? No, you read the manual and learn how to set it. Operating systems should be no different than that.

That being said, Linux does have a little way to go before it is "user friendly" enough for the average user. I would say Linux is like an import tuner car that experts or semi experts spend all day tweaking and tuning, while Windows is like the family sedan that is for everyday folks. However, even the family sedan requires you to learn how to run it before you can drive it, Windows does not.

Afkpuz
December 12th, 2007, 04:47 PM
Heck, I don't think gamers would be opposed to paying a company some money to play games on linux. I mean, they do it on windows. All it would take is for some mainstream game company to make linux compatible game and sell it in stores. Linux gamers would come out of the woodwork and devour that game, like warcraft 3 on the mac. As for all us free software people, we just have to settle for the free grames, which are pretty darn good.

Yfrwlf
December 12th, 2007, 06:21 PM
I think a bunch of people here have missed the boat.

I think you pointed out several good things, and that in general you're right, but you can never completely point the blame at this or that of course, and there are things that can be done to improve adoption on all sides of course. Microsoft is doing their share in promoting Linux adoption with Vista, for example.


Linux as a gaming platform would absolutely own Windows in the performance area, if the games were there. That's why Sony chose Linux as the core of both the PS2 and PS3 operating systems, they knew it could provide the necessary power to run the games, but also be light enough to not make the hardware struggle.

I actually hadn't ever heard that, I've largely ignored the PS3 since it's game development rate and all kinds of factors like Microsoft controlling both desktops and now somewhat controlling consoles making it easy for game companies to pretty much make one game for owning both markets. But with the price drops and because you can run Linux on it, it may make an excellent "media center" so I may have to get one now.


Your assuming that people even bothered to learn to use their existing OS. Part of the problem with the "insert CD, click play" functionality of Windows is that it has created entire generations of computer users who don't know the first thing about actually using a computer. To use the car analogy so often used in PC discussions; you need to learn to drive a car before you are allowed to drive one, but any idiot can turn on a computer. I don't think everyone should know how to build a PC or replace parts (that's why cars have mechanics), but at the very least every PC user should know their OS well enough to maintain it (get the oil changed, remember to fill that gas tank, etc.). Windows has created a world where far too many people don't know how to do that. I spend a lot of time on other gaming forums and it always makes me cringe when someone asks "How do I update my video drivers?". Do you take your car to the mechanic because you don't know how to set the clock on the radio? No, you read the manual and learn how to set it. Operating systems should be no different than that.

I know you at least partially agree, but I'll make the point any way. For basic things, like operating a car stereo, you're right that users whip out the manual. Well, they can do that with their computers using the F1 key, too. Developers and administrators are like mechanics, and not everyone is one. You can't expect everyone to be one. It would be best, yes, but it won't happen. I'm a support tech and know very well how frustrating users not understanding computers is, but the fact is users want easy. They will always want easy. They love consoles because there is no effort in running a program, it's just "stick it in and play", no jokes intended, and that's what they want to do. Linux needs to compete with Microsoft for these users by making it as simple as possible, and they have with easy package managers and online repositories, the only thing close Microsoft has is Xbox Live. Linux is much easier to use that way than Windows, no worrying about having to update your graphics card drivers if you do your system updates. So, while I understand your frustration cogadh, Ubuntu is on the right track by making it as easy as possible. After all, consumers want a computer that computes for them. Let us techs fix it for them if they don't wish to learn. That's a problem of them just not wanting to learn, and trying to force them to do so while trying to win desktop Linux adoption isn't going to work.


Heck, I don't think gamers would be opposed to paying a company some money to play games on linux. I mean, they do it on windows. All it would take is for some mainstream game company to make linux compatible game and sell it in stores. Linux gamers would come out of the woodwork and devour that game, like warcraft 3 on the mac. As for all us free software people, we just have to settle for the free grames, which are pretty darn good.

Some will once a game comes around that gives proper support, yeah. Unfortunately large companies usually don't want to afford to be risk takers and so far studios that have been "Microsoft certified developers" and the like in order to get development crap for making Windows games have, IMO, seemed to also have agreed with them not to promote other platforms like Linux. Maybe I'm a paranoid conspiracy nut but if you go to UT3's page (http://www.unrealtournament3.com) and QW:ET's page (http://www.enemyterritory.com/), look for any official mention that the game is for Linux, not to mention dropping all support of even including it in the box, so what you buy in the store, if you do buy it, is completely Linux sterile. In fact, go to Amazon and other gaming sites as well, and find something that is NOT a Linux gaming site that even mentions anywhere that they support Linux. Yeah, you may find some links and mentions buried down deep, but they certainly aren't advertising in any way whatsoever about the fact that they spent their own time and money to make a Linux version. It's like Microsoft told them "If you're gonna put the words Games for Vista on the top of the box and our logos and stuff, you better not have any other OSes mentioned on it, we won't allow it!" and what are they going to do? Not make their game for Windows? I don't think so, not when they only care about $$$ and nothing else matters to them. Hell, they don't even talk about system requirements on the main pages that I can find, either, and if you do manage to track down a system requirements info section on one of the stores, no mention of Linux:
Minimum System Requirements
# Windows XP SP2 or Windows Vista ...etc..etc...

Just hard for me to believe that them paying money for it didn't warrant even a mention anywhere like UT2004 had (penguin on the box), so I believe Microsoft wants just the marketing part at least to be suppressed, but whatever, regardless, eventually Linux won't be ignorable any longer. :P

Keep trying everyone, Linux will get there eventually.. >.<

cogadh
December 12th, 2007, 06:48 PM
Microsoft is doing their share in promoting Linux adoption with Vista, for example.

LOL! Vista: the best advertisement for Linux... ever.

Have you seen the new "Mac vs. PC" ads where PC calls a software reviewer to dispute the claim that Macs can run Vista faster than PCs can? Apparently Vista is also good at selling Macs.

Yfrwlf
December 12th, 2007, 07:19 PM
Have you seen the new "Mac vs. PC" ads where PC calls a software reviewer to dispute the claim that Macs can run Vista faster than PCs can? Apparently Vista is also good at selling Macs.

It has been from what I've heard. It's too bad all that money couldn't be put toward open source software instead...I mean, Mac is user friendly like many Linux desktops are with point-and-click on the huge buttons and all, but it's more proprietary than even Windows is, even if Apple may not be *as* evil as MS. :P I just wish consumers would choose total freedom over anything else, but most of them don't know about Linux. It's like voting for Ross Perot was, sort of a wasted vote but at least not a vote for the devil. Or whatever other political example you can think of. I feel there is a missing link in the chain for consumers getting the kind of freedom-licensed software they truly want.

Harpalus
December 12th, 2007, 07:28 PM
Wh-what!? Slower than XP!? Maybe on your system, my friend, but for most everyone else, any Linux system blows any Windows system out of the water in terms of speed. Linux doesn't have any of those nasty resource hogging system services that Windows has, plus, you don't really have to run additional resource hogs like antivirus or antispyware on Linux. Linux as a gaming platform would absolutely own Windows in the performance area, if the games were there. That's why Sony chose Linux as the core of both the PS2 and PS3 operating systems, they knew it could provide the necessary power to run the games, but also be light enough to not make the hardware struggle.


Properly maintained and customized, Windows XP IS just as fast as, say, Xubuntu.

The reason Sony chose Linux has little to do with performance, and everything to do with the hardware. Linux supports more platforms then Windows does, is much more portable in general, and, most notably, is far easier and cheaper to port to a new chip design then Windows is. I mean, hiring programmers to port the already portable Linux kernel is a LOT easier then forming agreements with Microsoft to port their decidedly non-portable OS to an entirely new chip design, particularly when it's a competitor. "Yes, sure, we'll just run Windows on it. I'm sure Microsoft will jump all over the opportunity to demonstrate support for a rival gaming platform."

cogadh
December 12th, 2007, 08:26 PM
Properly maintained and customized, Windows XP IS just as fast as, say, Xubuntu.
Didn't we just get through discussing the fact that the average Windows user does not even know how to properly customize or maintain a Windows machine? In an "out of the box" installation, I have never found Windows to boot or perform as fast as or faster than an out of the box Ubuntu or Kubuntu install. It gets even worse after you install any antivirus software with on-access or heuristic scanning, as all Windows machines should have.


The reason Sony chose Linux has little to do with performance, and everything to do with the hardware. Linux supports more platforms then Windows does, is much more portable in general, and, most notably, is far easier and cheaper to port to a new chip design then Windows is. I mean, hiring programmers to port the already portable Linux kernel is a LOT easier then forming agreements with Microsoft to port their decidedly non-portable OS to an entirely new chip design, particularly when it's a competitor. "Yes, sure, we'll just run Windows on it. I'm sure Microsoft will jump all over the opportunity to demonstrate support for a rival gaming platform."
True, portability had a lot to do with Sony's choice of Linux, but performance was also a huge factor. The fact that Linux is incredibly portable and the fact that it does that without sacrificing any performance made thier choice simple.
Besides, the choices they had were not limited to just Linux or Windows, there are other options out there, including the option to build an OS from scratch, which would have been relatively easy to do because of the console's static hardware profile. The fact that Linux was used just goes to show how a Linux system could be a gaming performance juggernaut.


When it comes to games, I just run Windows XP. Not out of any particular fondness for the operating system, but merely because it's the best tool for the task right now. I don't buy into this WINE nonsense. It doesn't play half my games adequately, nor as well as they run on Windows.
While you may consider Wine nonsense, those of us who are able to game very effectively with Wine would strongly disagree with you. Maybe the problem is your hardware (Wine seems to like Nvidia graphics, 32 bit processors and hardware mixing sound cards best) or how you have Wine configured, but when I can get a game like Half-Life 2 to run 40% faster than it does on Windows (63 FPS in Wine as compared to 45 FPS in Windows XP), there's no nonsense involved.
I also still run Windows XP solely for gaming purposes (dual-boot Kubuntu/Windows XP), but with every Wine release, I get one step closer to eliminating Windows entirely. In fact, the last Wine update just pulled two more titles off of my "Windows only" list. I still have quite a few games that Wine won't run and nearly all my new games will barely even install, but that will change as Wine progresses. Wine may not be the best solution for gaming on Linux, (native games would be) but until a better solution presents itself, I'll be sticking by it.

Harpalus
December 12th, 2007, 08:52 PM
While you may consider Wine nonsense, those of us who are able to game very effectively with Wine would strongly disagree with you. Maybe the problem is your hardware (Wine seems to like Nvidia graphics, 32 bit processors and hardware mixing sound cards best) or how you have Wine configured, but when I can get a game like Half-Life 2 to run 40% faster than it does on Windows (63 FPS in Wine as compared to 45 FPS in Windows XP), there's no nonsense involved.
I also still run Windows XP solely for gaming purposes (dual-boot Kubuntu/Windows XP), but with every Wine release, I get one step closer to eliminating Windows entirely. In fact, the last Wine update just pulled two more titles off of my "Windows only" list. I still have quite a few games that Wine won't run and nearly all my new games will barely even install, but that will change as Wine progresses. Wine may not be the best solution for gaming on Linux, (native games would be) but until a better solution presents itself, I'll be sticking by it.

"Nvidia graphics, 32 bit processors, and hardware mixing sound cards" Well now, there's your problem, as my gaming laptop has none of the above. ;) My intention wasn't to dismiss the Wine project as being nonsense, but rather, dismiss some Wine propaganda from uninformed users as being nonsense - specifically, occasional statements I see about how overall, Wine is superior to Windows right now, how it's pointless to "cling" to Windows, etc. Generally most of my games don't run in Wine, and I don't notice much of a performance increase on the ones that do. There are a number of circumstances where Wine can be faster and superior to Windows, but just as I see Ubuntu users making stupid blanket statements sometimes, sometimes I see Wine users making stupid blanket statements. It's just something I've noticed often, particularly from some co-workers of mine, which was why I raised the point.

If Wine were fully completed, integrated into the Ubuntu base system in an idiot-proof manner, then I agree that marketshare would expand by leaps and bounds, which was, I believe, the original point of the thread.

hikaricore
December 12th, 2007, 09:45 PM
"Nvidia graphics, 32 bit processors, and hardware mixing sound cards" Well now, there's your problem, as my gaming laptop has none of the above. ;) My intention wasn't to dismiss the Wine project as being nonsense, but rather, dismiss some Wine propaganda as being nonsense - specifically, occasional statements I see about how overall, Wine is superior to Windows right now, how it's pointless to "cling" to Windows, etc. Generally most of my games don't run in Wine, and I don't notice much of a performance increase on the ones that do. There are a number of circumstances where Wine can be faster and superior to Windows, but just as I see Ubuntu users making stupid blanket statements sometimes, sometimes I see Wine users making stupid blanket statements. It's just something I've noticed often, particularly from some co-workers of mine, which was why I raised the point.

I don't ever recall anyone from the WINE development team officially stating that WINE is superior to ***dows. So this rant is pointless. Listening to uninformed users about any topic will fill your head with misleading/flat-out wrong information. Have some sense about ya.

WINE does do an excellent job when it does work well /w software, perhaps you have just had unreal expectations of it, and are too dependant on vendor lock-in thanks to companies like Microsoft.


If Wine were fully completed, integrated into the Ubuntu base system in an idiot-proof manner, then I agree that marketshare would expand by leaps and bounds, which was, I believe, the original point of the thread.

This will NEVER happen. The entire point of Linux is to NOT try and be a free ***dows.
No sane Linux distro would ever integrate WINE into their release in such a way for reasons too numerous to go into.

FranMichaels
December 12th, 2007, 10:29 PM
I agree.

Wine, when it works with xyz app, makes Windows Optional. It should be preferred for legacy applications, or apps which have no Free equivalent. As for integrating Wine... I think it depends on your needs. I've installed it for 2 users.
They use it to run apps. No customization was required on my part (merely installing timidity allowed her music app to use it as MIDI out via wine). If this becomes the norm, no point in integration, just double click your setup.exe's. There is a Wine menu that shows up in Applications, etc.

Wine is not complete. It changes often, there are regressions, etc.
For some users, it does what they need.

If you want a full on Windows clone, look at ReactOS (http://www.reactos.org). They share code with the wine team too. So hopefully the compatibility is on par.

I might try it in a VM, as I just deleted my qemu images of 98SE and XP. I have had no use for them, and figured Wine has served me well for that odd app I use on occasion.

My needs aren't everyone however. But Wine is definitely useful. One day it may be the only way to run legacy win16 and win32 apps on multiple platforms and hardware (barring regular VM's)

/rant

Yfrwlf
December 13th, 2007, 03:47 AM
This will NEVER happen. The entire point of Linux is to NOT try and be a free ***dows.
No sane Linux distro would ever integrate WINE into their release in such a way for reasons too numerous to go into.

Perhaps "installed by default" was a better way to phrase it, and perhaps it's something Ubuntu will do once Canonical feels it's good enough to be there to try to run Windows programs for most users. Or, how about Ubuntu making it so that the EXE format opens up a prompt asking if they want Wine installed and giving a short few sentences of information about it, explaining that many Windows programs may not run using Wine but they can try and find out, and to instead buy and install Linux programs preferably. That would be a good happy medium I think.

hikaricore
December 13th, 2007, 05:51 AM
Perhaps "installed by default" was a better way to phrase it, and perhaps it's something Ubuntu will do once Canonical feels it's good enough to be there to try to run Windows programs for most users.

Not going to happen, ever.
What part of this is not clear?

The Ubuntu devs/community will never install WINE by default, for any reason.

This would just confuse users even more as to why program X works and program Y does not.
They'd end up saying things like "Well it's a free version of Ubuntu Windows, I don't understand why it can't run Windows programs correctly when Windows can."

We'd all rather skip that.

Lets move back on topic.

Yfrwlf
December 13th, 2007, 06:10 AM
[B] "Well it's a free version of Ubuntu Windows, I don't understand why it can't run Windows programs correctly when Windows can." We'd all rather skip that.

Understandable since Wine isn't fully functional and will never be until Microsoft is gone basically, but I still think that making it easy for users to do what they want to do should be Ubuntu's goal. It has auto-installation of codecs, printers, and programs, so why not Wine for exe's as long as it's explained that it may not run Windows programs correctly and is not intended as a replacement and that they should look on website XYZ (like Osalt (http://www.osalt.com/)) to find a Linux native alternative? If you don't want to deal with Wine at all then why even have it in the Add/Remove list? You think making it slightly easier for someone to install it is bad? That's not Ubuntu's motto, IMO.

And Wine is very much on topic when it comes to Linux gaming, unfortunately. ;)

I think making it easier for Linux to run Windows games is partially achieving the goal of gaming on Linux, even if it's not native, because it allows animals to run the OS they like, and the games they like. Until more Linux games come about, that is part of the solution, and more Linux games will come about when Linux has wider adoption, and it will have wider adoption in part because it can run more software. It helps solve the Linux catch-22.

jerome1232
December 13th, 2007, 06:15 AM
Bug the companies that develop the games, and hope enough people bug 'em they start developing for it. just like Dell got enough requests for linux they (kinda) started providing it as an OEM option

hikaricore
December 13th, 2007, 06:20 AM
WINE is in the Universe repos for a reason and not officially supported.

The goal of Ubuntu is not to make it easier to game on Linux or run ***dows applications.
Installing WINE by default is not going to bring around the change in ways. That's just silly.

Get back on topic.

Yfrwlf
December 13th, 2007, 11:10 AM
Bug the companies that develop the games, and hope enough people bug 'em they start developing for it. just like Dell got enough requests for linux they (kinda) started providing it as an OEM option

I think it can help, and everyone should try. I've been trying myself, but heh, sometimes you get shouted at for being a fanboy or whatnot, but hey, I want games for my platform so I can voice my opinion if I wanna. ;) It depends who the company listens to, though, and what they use to gauge interest levels. It's all a difficult and pretty pathetic way creativity-wise to try to decide what to make next, a problem the entire entertainment industry has had and it's what causes sequelitis, but it's one of the few ways they can do it. If they listen to the number of computers sold with Windows, that would certainly be a terrible indicator since it's forced onto most every PC. I would guess game companies like Epic and id would be interested in looking at how many clients of what type connect to multiplayer game servers though.

wild_oscar
December 13th, 2007, 11:16 AM
Wh-what!? Slower than XP!? Maybe on your system, my friend, but for most everyone else, any Linux system blows any Windows system out of the water in terms of speed. Linux doesn't have any of those nasty resource hogging system services that Windows has, plus, you don't really have to run additional resource hogs like antivirus or antispyware on Linux. Linux as a gaming platform would absolutely own Windows in the performance area, if the games were there. That's why Sony chose Linux as the core of both the PS2 and PS3 operating systems, they knew it could provide the necessary power to run the games, but also be light enough to not make the hardware struggle.


Ubuntu is a slow distro. Don't get me wrong, I use it on a day to day basis. But that doesn't could my judgment: on a dual boot machine, Windows XP will work faster than Ubuntu.


any Linux system blows any Windows system out of the water in terms of speed
Not true. Can be true for some for some distributions, such as Slackware, but definitely not for Ubuntu. Ease of use comes with a price.

DarwinsTheory
December 13th, 2007, 12:05 PM
I've spent 6 months with Ubuntu now and I'm happy as...

No issues playing games at all... Tremulous, Urban Terror.. ETQW.. CS:S via WINE...

And still boots 10 times quicker than XP on my box..

Man I love Ubuntu...!

Matt

weblordpepe
December 13th, 2007, 05:29 PM
boots slow for me :( xp faster. i dont understand how tho. ubuntu cant be that bloated.

cogadh
December 13th, 2007, 05:48 PM
Ubuntu is a slow distro. Don't get me wrong, I use it on a day to day basis. But that doesn't could my judgment: on a dual boot machine, Windows XP will work faster than Ubuntu.

Not true. Can be true for some for some distributions, such as Slackware, but definitely not for Ubuntu. Ease of use comes with a price.
Again, that might be true for your system, but on my dual boot system, it is not. Yes I have Windows configured for speed (limited services running, only antivirus added to startup, etc.) and it is properly maintained (regular defrag, cleanups). Despite that, my Kubuntu partition runs faster than Windows. It boots quicker, has better gaming performance, better network performance, greater resource availability... The same was also true when I had Ubuntu.

I have used several different distributions over the years, and with only one exception, all have performed faster than Windows (the exception was a virtual disk based system, kind of like Wubi, performance loss was expected). Slackware, Red Hat, Suse, Storm Linux, Fedora, Mandriva... too many "fly by night" distros to mention, all have out done Windows in speed. They didn't necessarily match Windows in functionality until the last few years, but the performance was already there.

The only way I can see Ubuntu performing slower than Windows is if your system hardware has lackluster support in Linux or you run Linux resource hogs, like Compiz. My systems have always been very well supported (no hardware that is too new or too different) and I don't waste my time with things like Compiz, so maybe that could explain why my experiences seem to fly in the face of what others have said.

Just to get this back on topic (again), if the perception (or truth) is that Ubuntu in particular and Linux in general performs slower than Windows, then maybe that is one of the things that needs to be addressed in a concrete fashion before gaming on Linux can become a reality. What developer wants to develop on a system that is seen as an underachiever?

If it is just a perception thing, then some actual side-by-side benchmark testing should be done, i.e. two identical systems, one with Linux, one with Windows, testing the same applications. It would be difficult to do, since there are so few cross-platform apps that would be worth using for the test, but I'm sure there are some. For gaming, you could test Doom 3, ET: Quake Wars, one of the Unreals, probably a few others. I'm not sure of any non gaming apps that would really be suitable for the test.

If the test proves the perception true then what needs to happen to correct it? More kernel development? Better drivers? If Linux is really slower than Windows, then there must be certain areas of Linux development that could be focused on to correct that.

Beren Camlost
December 13th, 2007, 08:04 PM
Ubuntu is a slow distro. Don't get me wrong, I use it on a day to day basis. But that doesn't could my judgment: on a dual boot machine, Windows XP will work faster than Ubuntu.

Windows XP boots up about 10 times slower than my Kubuntu Feisty installation. Most Windows games loads faster in Kubuntu using Wine than running the games natively in Windows. Performance in-game varies, some games performs better in Wine, some perform better in Windows. If Ubuntu outperforms Windows when it comes to native Windows games, can you imagine the leap in performance it would be if these games ran in Linux/Ubuntu natively? My guess is that you are either stuck with Intel or ATI graphics, which is known to give poor performance in Linux (due to poor drivers). While Windows XP may perform better on your system, probably due to your hardware and/or driver configuration, it's slowly becoming an acclaimed fact that Ubuntu blows any version of Windows away performance-wise, even when it comes to running native Windows games (obviously not those Windows games that won't run in Wine yet).

Kibbo
December 15th, 2007, 03:01 AM
I think I just had a brainstorm, If I can return the conversation to the idea of a linux-only killer app. Picture this:

World of Warcraft2, available for Windows Q4 2009. Open Beta available on Linux Q3.

If a company wanted to break the windows monopoly, that's how you'd do it. To make money, you need to launch on windows, period. Give linux a temporary monopoly. Then watch them come.

I'm not saying that's what I want to see, just what would work.

cogadh
December 15th, 2007, 03:28 AM
The only way that might happen is if they intend to release a Linux client at some point. Considering the original WoW did have a Linux beta and we never saw a full client after release, I don't think that will happen. Besides, they would be far more likely to focus on a Windows client first, then maybe a Linux client later.

Honestly, the only way that I could see something like that happening would be for an existing Linux developer to come up with a truly kick-*** game that is released for Linux first, then ported to Windows later.

johnykat
December 15th, 2007, 05:05 AM
What I think, is that they should start writing games built on the live CD/DVD philosophy and then you don't have to worry about the os that resides on the hard drive.... you know, forget the OS, who needs it anyways... the future right?

john

hikaricore
December 15th, 2007, 05:59 AM
What I think, is that they should start writing games built on the live CD/DVD philosophy and then you don't have to worry about the os that resides on the hard drive.... you know, forget the OS, who needs it anyways... the future right?

john

Right because I love having to reboot my computer every time i want to play a different game.. I take it you missed the days of dos and game boot discs? This is not a good idea. You're better off getting a console game system with this ideology.

weblordpepe
December 15th, 2007, 11:29 AM
Or reverse engineering the Win32 API so you can run your games in *nix.

hikaricore
December 15th, 2007, 11:57 AM
Or reverse engineering the Win32 API so you can run your games in *nix.

Hmmm that is a bloody wonderful idea! I can't believe no one thought of this 15 years ago! :lolflag:

weblordpepe
December 16th, 2007, 01:51 PM
Hmmm that is a bloody wonderful idea! I can't believe no one thought of this 15 years ago! :lolflag:Yeah it will be a massive task, and there will be people having ethical debates about its very existence for years. Although it will definately be a deciding factor in bringing many people from Windows over to Linux.

phenest
December 16th, 2007, 02:14 PM
I don't know if anything like this has been mentioned, but here goes:

What about some sort of run-time environment (analogous to Java's JRE), that could be ported to different OS's (Windows, Linux, Mac, BSD, etc), and then games would be written so they are dependent on the run-time environment instead of the OS. That way, providing you have the appropriate run-time installed, you could play that game on any OS you choose.

There doesn't have to be one run-time environment either. Each games producer could have their own if they wish, providing they port it to each OS. The necessary run-time for that game could ship with the game with run-times for each supported OS. The run-time would only be installed if you either don't have it installed at all, or it needs upgrading.

When the run-time installs, it would configure itself (plus manually if need be) to your hardware configuration.

This way, they don't have to port the game to every OS, but just the run-time. The run-time could be re-used for future games.

weblordpepe
December 17th, 2007, 07:57 AM
Microsoft calls that DirectX. In the linux world you have SDL and OpenGL/ALSA. Adobe calls it Flash, and Microsoft calls it Spotlight. Confused? So is Microsoft. Playsforsure anyone?

phenest
December 17th, 2007, 01:13 PM
Microsoft calls that DirectX. In the linux world you have SDL and OpenGL/ALSA. Adobe calls it Flash, and Microsoft calls it Spotlight. Confused? So is Microsoft. Playsforsure anyone?

I was thinking of something more than that. So the game doesn't need to worry about what OS it's running on or whether to use DirectX or OpenGL or what API's to call or what libraries to use. It would be an intermediate layer than lies in between all that and the game. The game would only communicate with this layer and not the OS.

This would not be for running current PC games. but for a future generation of games that are not OS dependent.

atomkarinca
December 17th, 2007, 01:27 PM
I was thinking of something more than that. So the game doesn't need to worry about what OS it's running on or whether to use DirectX or OpenGL or what API's to call or what libraries to use. It would be an intermediate layer than lies in between all that and the game. The game would only communicate with this layer and not the OS.

This would not be for running current PC games. but for a future generation of games that are not OS dependent.

I guess you're talking about something like Steam?

phenest
December 17th, 2007, 05:53 PM
I guess you're talking about something like Steam?

I dunno. What is it? A link would be handy.

Steveway
December 17th, 2007, 06:00 PM
It sounds more like Java or C#.
Cross-plattform, you only have to write it once etc...
But this approach has a major downside: Slowness, yup, this will be slow, like Java or C#.

phenest
December 17th, 2007, 06:33 PM
It sounds more like Java or C#.
Cross-plattform, you only have to write it once etc...
But this approach has a major downside: Slowness, yup, this will be slow, like Java or C#.

I think if it's done right, performance shouldn't be an issue.

atomkarinca
December 17th, 2007, 07:19 PM
I dunno. What is it? A link would be handy.


Steam allows users to purchase access to games through a digital distribution system. Instead of receiving a box, disc, or even CD key, purchased software is immediately attached on the Steam servers to the user's Steam account (which is registered for free), from which it can be accessed and downloaded from anywhere that allows the use of the Steam client. Games can either be bought individually (with some exceptions) or as part of a "package" of multiple games.

It's basically a Windows software but you can run it using Wine perfectly fine, so you can play any game you can download from Steam without depending on the OS.

phenest
December 17th, 2007, 07:45 PM
I want to be able to do it without installing Wine. I may as well dual boot with Windows. Wine, as far as I'm concerned, is a security risk to a perfectly secure Linux environment.

Wine is a workaround, not a solution.

atomkarinca
December 17th, 2007, 09:44 PM
What I wanted to say was: if you can build an environment like Steam, but OS-independent, then you wouldn't worry about porting the games. Steam was just an example.Also if it can be run through Wine then it can very well be ported to Linux.

chris4585
December 17th, 2007, 10:02 PM
i think someone should make a console around Unix, i mean phones are starting to be based on linux

Yfrwlf
December 17th, 2007, 11:13 PM
i think someone should make a console around Unix, i mean phones are starting to be based on linux

I've had a little more ambitious idea where it could be integrated with a software store system like Xbox Live or whatnot, but as for consoles running Linux, if the PS3 uses Linux as it's kernel then there's that, but I'm sure you mean a console where you can play Linux desktop games either on the console or on the desktop, or in other words, a mini-computer for your TV that has an interface that allows quick and easy access to games. Well, since you can just make your X interface easy to use in several different ways, that's all it would be basically is a computer. I'm sure that in the future it will just be screens, and various sizes of computers and you can use them in any combination. Any way, a Linux console would be cool and cheap depending on the hardware, but it's just a matter of consumers wanting to buy it and developers making games for it. Why did developers make games for the PS3, Wii, or Xbox? Lots and lots of marketing. Plus, developers probably felt "safe" making games for it because of all the marketing they knew was going to be spent on it. I dunno, it's a big can of worms. >.< All I know is that I wish more revenue streams could be created for Linux to help power something like that, and also help power open source software.


I was thinking of something more than that. So the game doesn't need to worry about what OS it's running on or whether to use DirectX or OpenGL or what API's to call or what libraries to use. It would be an intermediate layer than lies in between all that and the game. The game would only communicate with this layer and not the OS.

This would not be for running current PC games. but for a future generation of games that are not OS dependent.


Microsoft calls that DirectX. In the linux world you have SDL and OpenGL/ALSA. Adobe calls it Flash, and Microsoft calls it Spotlight. Confused? So is Microsoft. Playsforsure anyone?

Virtualization has captivated a lot of companies, but what weblordpepe said was right, all you're talking about is everyone agreeing on a standard way of doing things. JRE is nice because you can make one thing and have it work on all platforms, sure, but you can have standards that are cross-platform as well without having a virtual machine. HTML is cross-platform. Same is true to some degree for OpenGL games, it provides a common language for 3D/2D graphics, so it's like a VM but not as intensive. What would be nice is an *API* for all OSes, for all needed aspects of a program. Imagine all OSes being able to install any program. Aaah, true modularity.

Of course, the proprietary OSes hate stuff like that, unless they are small and are begging for attention. I'm sure Microsoft hates letting Java get installed on their systems. Spotlight and other attempts by them toward "open source" and such are hilarious, because they all say "can only be used on Windows" at some point in their licenses, and/or they just flat out depend on Windows-only systems. But that's another topic. :rolleyes:

chris4585
December 18th, 2007, 12:45 AM
i think i understand what you mean, like sort of running a PS3 inside linux, windows, and mac? and being able to play games? in a simple explination, am i right or wrong?

weblordpepe
December 18th, 2007, 06:58 AM
I think the idea is basically a common environment for all software to work, regardless of the OS.

Kinda reminds me of how cheap consoles back in the day could play Atari 2600 games. The problem really is that the environment that the program runs in is the OS, really.

One risk we run with pushing Wine is that Windows could be that default environment. That means forever chasing Microsoft's tail as far as software enhancements go. Again.

Yfrwlf
December 18th, 2007, 01:28 PM
i think i understand what you mean, like sort of running a PS3 inside linux, windows, and mac? and being able to play games? in a simple explination, am i right or wrong?

Yes, or quite simply allowing developers to make programs that can run on a set of common "APIs" or basically in a common environment. Emulators do this but they are "higher level", they aren't integrated deeply into the system to allow lower-level direct hardware to be able to more quickly run them. Basically it's a virtualization layer, from what I understand, and it can be shallow or deep. The deeper it is, the faster it is. This is what virtualization is trying to do right now, is allow for very low-level support so that the OS is meaningless, and on top of it you can run any other system, but running any other program is a much more worthy goal I think as far as desktop users are concerned. If all OSes had a common environment in which to run programs, you could run those programs on any OS that had this environment installed in it. Like JRE (Java), or a VM manager like VMWare/VirtualBox/Qemu. Or, on a higher level quite simply an emulator.


I think the idea is basically a common environment for all software to work, regardless of the OS.

Kinda reminds me of how cheap consoles back in the day could play Atari 2600 games. The problem really is that the environment that the program runs in is the OS, really.

One risk we run with pushing Wine is that Windows could be that default environment. That means forever chasing Microsoft's tail as far as software enhancements go. Again.

Right, so one solution is to try to standardize on a certain platform's common APIs/libraries/etc for programs to use to run, of which Wine would be an example of, but you could also make a lowish-level program like Wine but for the Linux platform so it could be run in Windows and on Mac.

You're right, standardizing on a proprietary and closed source environment would be bad, you need to base your efforts on one that is open source and truly free and accessible. JRE is now at least mostly open source and "unlocked" in most ways, I think, but it's fairly big as far as it being more of a full "machine", but smaller than, say, VMWare. Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand about virtualization, if you have lower-level access, or basically remove the bloat between the program that you want to run and the OS/drivers/hardware, then that's what you want, and that's basically what using a common set of libraries would be doing. OpenGL isn't a virtual machine, it's a bunch of libraries that can be installed on any OS allowing any programs that use it to be able to very directly access the computers hardware rendering chips. That's the kind of thing you want, and that's also basically what Wine has become too, Wine isn't a bloated virtual machine, but it's stripped out all the unneeded stuff required to run an entirely different OS's applications on top of your existing OS without having the whole OS itself, and just uses libraries that access your hardware just like OpenGL libraries would pretty much. So, I would think that's what you truly want, a set of open source libraries that can be compiled for installation on any OS to give programs everything they need. For example WXWidgets (http://www.wxwidgets.org/) can be used for a standard way for making a GUI, so it along with OpenGL encompasses a lot of what is required for programs/games to be run on any OS. This sounds to me like more of what we need, and if more programs could be made using these cross-platform libraries then the program will have more support because it will reach a larger audience, and we'd have more games and programs for Linux which would allow more users to switch, but having much of a reason left to stay with Windows.

stoffe
December 18th, 2007, 02:05 PM
Now, I haven't read the whole thread, or even most of it, but here is my take (from someone who works with games, nonetheless):

There are basically two kinds of people I know as of lately, especially after Vista: The gamers and those who are getting a Mac for their own personal use. Work place use hasn't really changed for anyone. Yes, of course there are some odd one outs, like myself. But generally, those are the two.

The Mac people are easily accounted for, they get a boxed working solution and they get marketed to. Do the same and they may be yours.

The gamers are about games which in turn is mostly about market share, but to some extent about how easy it is to do a Linux release (See Epic, ID). And there's a lot of misguided but proud talk about "they should come to us", "vote with your wallet" and "there are plenty of games already". Here's what I think everyone is missing about games, market share, future share, consoles and wine:

When we talk about office apps, or budget/taxes, or whatever, there is always a way to replace it with free software given enough effort. And what do we almost always do? Make it compatible with the leading proprietary apps. And why? Because of legacy documents in legacy formats, and to be compatible.

Well here's the kicker: games are not applications, they are legacy documents. Not technically, but philosophically. They are unique documents (like a book or a film) locked in a proprietary format (for the most part). The standard reader is called Windows. This is why projects like MAME, SCummVM and all other emulators exists and are very popular, among Windows kids too.

The program that reads these legacy documents is called Wine (yes, yes, there are some alternatives). Some say that this is the wrong way to go because we should build our own free versions, we should not copy Windows etc. The idea being that if we switch first, the games will come.

But that is missing the point, and shows a deep non-understanding of a gamers mind. It will not be enough to get most gamers to switch even if it was a promise. Seriously.

Because it isn't just about the new games. And even if a select few is good with WoW, those are not everyone. For most of us gamers, we don't just want the next fix all the time. We want to be able to replay the classics and catch up on the great ones we may have missed as well.

Some of us needs to be able to revisit Grim Fandango, Planescape: Torment, Counter-strike 1.6 or Crimsonland on at least a yearly basis. ;) We got a lot of other games covered with various console emulations, but not these. Give the gamers their old games and they will be able to switch. And then, the new games will come.

Photoshop could be replaced, Office is already close, Windows easily - but the games can't. They just can't. And the games that do exist generally does not compare. It is not the party line to say so, but just look at the few I mentioned above, none of them new. There just is nothing like them. And telling the world that whatever that strategy game is called is enough for you is just not contributing, it's misguided pride in the pack.

This is why Wine is so very very important. A large, huge part of the home user audience is not letting go of their games. This is why everyone should help in any way they can with Wine, and Canonical should pour money into the project. This is a large part of bug #1. Trust me.

Yfrwlf
December 18th, 2007, 02:24 PM
This is why Wine is so very very important. A large, huge part of the home user audience is not letting go of their games. This is why everyone should help in any way they can with Wine, and Canonical should pour money into the project. This is a large part of bug #1. Trust me.

Agreed. (and Wine is on topic)

They are fixed, because to be unfixed the source code would have to be released and that's not going to happen at least for a very long time if ever. It would be best if new games were made cross-platform or for open source non-proprietary environments, but adoption of those environments is the biggest factor, and it won't happen until more users switch, and more users will switch in part when they can run those legacy applications they love. The new games will come later (or at the same time). There is no single solution to Linux adoption though, don't get me wrong, it's lots of things, and I believe your goal is one of those things. Propelling development of new games for non-proprietary/non-closed and/or cross-platform environments is another.

stoffe
December 18th, 2007, 02:34 PM
Some extra points that are sorta given from my post above, but I realized is not spelled out:

Almost noone, including the gamers, are switching to Vista. At least not until they absolutely have to. They run XP. Wine needs to catch up with XP, if that happens fast enough, they don't need to catch up anymore. ;)

Wine needs to be really integrated into the distros (even if optional, it's ok if it has to be a choice to install it, but make Windows EXEs recognized and tip about it when someone clicks them).

Most importantly: games will be made for free platforms when the makers run the platform themselves. Market share is not everything, if the game makers use the platform they will have incentive to make things for it. It is already a great platform for almost anything else, but game makers, even at the highest levels of descision making, are often gamers today. See previous post...

phenest
December 18th, 2007, 02:56 PM
Agreed. (and Wine is on topic)

No-one said Wine is off topic, but they are good reasons why Wine is not the solution. Not because it's closed source, but because it needs something more neutral. As someone else said, MS are unlikely to help with Wine, therefor it's needs to be a non-Windows approach.

I'm no developer (I am a programmer though), but the general consensus is to develop a common set of API's. This sounds an excellent idea.

I think this is no longer directed at having games running on Linux, but would be a solution for ALL OS's.

One more thing springs to mind: This may be a project that needs to be developed independently of games makers. That is, it could be developed and then offered to different games software companies to see if they will adopt it. And if the work has already been done for them, I don't see why they wouldn't. Perhaps they could re-release older titles as a testing ground. Given time, newer games will follow suit.

One more thought: OS's tend to have a different folder hierarchy from each other, would this affect the way the game installed?

stoffe
December 18th, 2007, 03:33 PM
Oh, so you're on that old discussion. Should have known. Seen it a million times and everybody gets so up in arms and think they have such a great idea, why hasn't anybody done this before....

Look guys, it's not like it hasn't been discussed *and* tried a lot of times and well, it just doesn't make a difference. Really. It's been beaten to death over and over and over again. Here are 2 *quick* reasons why, even if you built the perfect API with even somewhat good tools:

1. Even when companies use these, today already existing tools, they don't bother to build, release, market or test and support it for a platform with virtually no gamers. This is true today and has been for the last 5 years or so. Many games are built using technology that today could compile to Linux relatively easily. Almost any game for PC *and* a non-Xbox console, for instance. And even many of the rest are built using technology that has full support for more, see point #2. The technology is already here and it's already capable.

2. Even before that stage, Microsoft often gives companies a lot of money to make it a XNA/XBox/Windows game instead, "proving" that it is an excellent development platform and getting more gamers to their platform.

It's politics and economics, absolutely zero to do with any pragmatics or even having a "better" solution for whatever defintion of better. It just doesn't work that way, and it probably shouldn't either, because that would mean going out of business.

What you are discussing already exists. There just is no incentive.

First the gamers, then the games.

(For non-games it is already less of a problem in general, except for what? Photoshop? that is just one app that *could* be fixed).

phenest
December 18th, 2007, 05:42 PM
Oh, so you're on that old discussion...

Yes, I am. And it's still as valid as any other. It justs needs more thought.

And I really don't know what software companies have to lose by porting a entire game to Linux anyway. Who's running their company? Them or MS? They'd still be making sales. More in fact. Perhaps a petition to show them how many people would buy it for Linux.

Steveway
December 18th, 2007, 05:47 PM
Microsoft pays them not to support other consoles and Operating-systems.
Look at Bioshock for an example, it uses the cross-plattform UT3-engine but cause Microsoft payed them they only released it for Windows and the Xbox.

cogadh
December 18th, 2007, 08:15 PM
A couple of points that seem to have been missed or misrepresented in recent posts:
Steam is just a content delivery system, the fact that it works in Wine does not mean that the games available through it will also work in Wine. I have several games through Steam and although most of them do work fine, not all do. For example, I have Thief Deadly Shadows purchased and installed through Steam. Just like the original CD version of the game, it does not work at all in Wine.
Wine is not closed source at all. It is and always has been an open source project. The development that has been done on Wine is completely community based and has been done using just the API documentation publicly provided by Microsoft without any additional help from MS. In fact, I don't think the Wine devs would even want any help from MS, since that would likely mean MS attaching some draconian licensing agreement to Wine.
There already are common API's that will work on any platform; OpenGL, OpenAL, SDL, etc. The problem is Microsoft already has developers either bound by contract or convention to the DirectX API. It is not easy to take a DirectX based game and convert it to an open standard that will work natively on Linux. Even if the developers are not bound by a contract to stick with DirectX, the cost and man hours involved in converting a game is not worth it for the few sales they might gain from Linux users.

weblordpepe
December 19th, 2007, 06:56 AM
Spot on, dogadh. Microsoft is all too happy to make a common API and common evironment for developers. Of course it has to be on a MS platform tho. Grr.

foolsh
December 19th, 2007, 08:28 AM
Quick idea:
there a so many flavors of ubuntu,,, xubuntu kubuntu fluxbuntu edubuntu you name it they got it, what if there was one more to the flock? Gambuntu- linux for gamers and game developers
Install all the really great games like:
Frets on fire
Tremulous
egoboo
others (http://gamesuy.blogspot.com/2007/12/top-10-free-linux-3d-games.html)
dont forget tools like 3dblender POV and crystal space.
Maybe add some audio stuff like hydrogen and timidity
Mold it around the gaming experiance.
Does a gamer need Open office taking up valuable hard drive space?
I think even installing WINE and DOSbox by defualt possibly configured and setup at user creation.
Theres so many games not just new but oldies but goodies (http://www.abandonia.com/) as well

weblordpepe
December 19th, 2007, 11:04 AM
Eeeehhh too many distros. Why can't one use Ubuntu for gaming? Instead of making up a whole new OS and support-line, why not just make a package which installs all the gaming stuff, and throw it into the repository?

stoffe
December 19th, 2007, 02:03 PM
Yes, I am. And it's still as valid as any other. It justs needs more thought.

Any discussion is valid, per se, but it pays to do some research if it's gonna lead anywhere and not just waste everyones time. Some starting points: Has the subject been up before? What was the outcome? Why? Has something changed since then? What, if so? How does that affect the situation? So, what can we do now, that wasn't viable before?


And I really don't know what software companies have to lose by porting a entire game to Linux anyway. Who's running their company? Them or MS? They'd still be making sales. More in fact. Perhaps a petition to show them how many people would buy it for Linux.

Maybe you don't know, but they do, and as do I. You could know too, if you researched it. It's not like the company would automatically have more free sales by making the descision.

Any cross-platform solution, no matter how good, will never be better than say Java: write once, debug everywhere. Computers and software are simply just too complex for anything else. There will be subtle (and not so subtle) differences that needs to be found and addressed.

That costs a lot of money. Testing, QA, Linux knowledgable people, machines, time, etc. Then there's support. Same thing again. Oh, what's that? You can do without support, just give us the game? That has happened, and is generally a bad deal for the company.

You see, if they don't release the game on Linux, nobody much cares or singles them out. But if they release anything with problems, they are gonna get a lot of bad press, and if there is no support, even more so. "Game Company X doesn't care about Linux users!" on Slashdot. You know the drill. So, in fact, it's a better deal to not release it at all unless doing it all the way and properly.

Another case for testing/QA/etc: Multiplayer. That MUST work and work the same on all platforms. Each platform is a huge cost.

I could go on forever with reasons why this isn't just free money and more customers. The game companies today know these things, and it isn't that they don't know about Linux or the user base. Today just about anyone in IT has a pretty good idea of that market, because it's in the news all the time and they have already looked into it and done the math.

The customers are few, by the way. There aren't many gamers and even fewer that are prepared to pay. Petitions have been tried before, but by all means, please try it again. Predicted result: not very many, and when double checked, only 10% actually meant they will pay, the rest said so to support their platform of choice. Again.

Want to actually, really, truly get anywhere with this? Research. What is the actual situation, what is the facts, not only "I think it should work like...", then see what can be done to change that, actual, real situation.

Wishful thinking gets us nowhere. Facts and practical measures gets us forward...

cogadh
December 19th, 2007, 04:43 PM
Quick idea:
there a so many flavors of ubuntu,,, xubuntu kubuntu fluxbuntu edubuntu you name it they got it, what if there was one more to the flock? Gambuntu- linux for gamers and game developers
Install all the really great games like:
Frets on fire
Tremulous
egoboo
others (http://gamesuy.blogspot.com/2007/12/top-10-free-linux-3d-games.html)
dont forget tools like 3dblender POV and crystal space.
Maybe add some audio stuff like hydrogen and timidity
Mold it around the gaming experiance.
Does a gamer need Open office taking up valuable hard drive space?
I think even installing WINE and DOSbox by defualt possibly configured and setup at user creation.
Theres so many games not just new but oldies but goodies (http://www.abandonia.com/) as well

Already been suggested and is completely unnecessary. Everything you want to be installed by default is easily installed manually in regular Ubuntu. Everything you want to not include can just as easily be removed manually. Not to mention, some of those items, especially the abandonware games, have licensing constraints that prevent them from being distributed with an OS.

Besides, is there a "Microsoft Windows Gamer's Edition"? No, so why should there be a separate gaming version of Ubuntu? Games should just work on the OS, no matter what edition it is (as long as it is not an old and out of date OS). Generally speaking, native games do just work on Ubuntu, so again, why would you need a different gamer's edition to do the same things that the regular edition already does?

Making a gamer's edition wouldn't solve the problem of the pitiful lack of AAA games on Linux anyway. It would just be yet another distribution that can only play a few lackluster games, nothing more. What we need is some development/publishing company to stand up and really commit to Linux. They need to be willing to risk the expense stoffe described and actually support the platform fully. Unfortunately, that will never happen as long as there are only a handful of us who use Linux and want to game on it.

Yfrwlf
December 19th, 2007, 05:47 PM
No-one said Wine is off topic, but they are good reasons why Wine is not the solution. Not because it's closed source, but because it needs something more neutral. As someone else said, MS are unlikely to help with Wine, therefor it's needs to be a non-Windows approach.

I'm no developer (I am a programmer though), but the general consensus is to develop a common set of API's. This sounds an excellent idea.

I think this is no longer directed at having games running on Linux, but would be a solution for ALL OS's.

One more thing springs to mind: This may be a project that needs to be developed independently of games makers. That is, it could be developed and then offered to different games software companies to see if they will adopt it. And if the work has already been done for them, I don't see why they wouldn't. Perhaps they could re-release older titles as a testing ground. Given time, newer games will follow suit.

One more thought: OS's tend to have a different folder hierarchy from each other, would this affect the way the game installed?

First off, specifically hikaricore stated that this idea:


Wine needs to be really integrated into the distros (even if optional, it's ok if it has to be a choice to install it, but make Windows EXEs recognized and tip about it when someone clicks them).

was off topic, and I agree with the idea, but if others don't that's fine, that's the point of discussion, but I don't think Wine is off-topic or it's ease of use in Ubuntu to make Windows gaming on Ubuntu easier.

Regardless, as for your idea about wanting to focus on something neutral instead, I would agree that that's also a great idea in theory. If developers were presented with a completely cross-platform, easy to use set of complete APIs so that porting would be minimal if it required any work at all (which would be the best sort of API), and at that point there would be no reason whatsoever not to use such an API to market your title to a broader audience of platforms. Why make a game just for the Xbox when you can make it for all the systems and reach that many more users and get that much more money?

Because of what stoffe mentioned. Microsoft pushes their APIs with money, and it makes developers jump into their exclusive bandwagon. This happens with all the other software companies too, in pushing exclusive titles. Think about it. Why would any game company be interested in making an exclusive title? Helloooo? That would be stupid, why would you want to get less money by offering your game on less systems? The answer is kickbacks, and Microsoft has the deepest pockets and their APIs are "cross-platform" between the XBox, and Windows, hitting two very large markets. Besides, you probably have to bow down to them and sign who knows how many contracts and agreements in order to use all their "developer tools" that they offer, so there is probably tons of lockin going on behind the scenes there. This is a common business tactic used today.

I do agree, though, that if you provide those APIs, there will be adoption among many of the smaller non-monopolistic vendors and it will put pressure on these companies to narrow their exclusivity game. Cross-platform APIs are a great weapon against monopolies pushing exclusivity, and it should overtake them eventually. Having cross-platform APIs also means that Linux gets a boost from the success of other OSes using those cross-platform APIs because it means there is more pressure for the APIs, and Linux adoption becomes that much easier. Hence, why Microsoft hates such concepts.

As for the directory hierarchy thing, all that would be needed is a common package installer API, or a way for most all Linux package managers to deal with a variety of types. This is something I've been asking for and talking about for ages, trying to understand why it's not done. Make a .Linux file or .LNX or whatever, or make it a container format, and allow DEB, RPM, and other format types to be used within the container, then just worry about making your package manager know how to deal with it. That really needs to happen to make Linux more accessible by users and so-called "3rd party" developers alike.

I guess the moral of this discussion is there really needs to be more standardized useful APIs, or if there is already there needs to be more effort to use them.


Yes, I am. And it's still as valid as any other. It justs needs more thought.

And I really don't know what software companies have to lose by porting a entire game to Linux anyway. Who's running their company? Them or MS? They'd still be making sales. More in fact. Perhaps a petition to show them how many people would buy it for Linux.

Linux is a small fraction of their market, or so they think, and it is true to a great degree, Linux is still uncommon at least here in the U.S. and most places all over Europe too. So making games for Linux isn't common yet, and I've already told you about exclusivity. Cross-platform games would be much more of a boon than Linux games, but Linux games are good too. ;) I think there should definitely be more effort in cross-platform APIs though.


Microsoft pays them not to support other consoles and Operating-systems.
Look at Bioshock for an example, it uses the cross-plattform UT3-engine but cause Microsoft payed them they only released it for Windows and the Xbox.

Exactly, exclusivity, it happens all the time, it's called a monopoly. Microsoft pays them or forces them to kiss their butts if they want to use their development tools and the like, and forms god knows what and how many agreements with them for who knows how many different kinds of things. Microsoft stays on top, being a monopoly, and they make more money, making up for the cost of paying a company to be exclusive. In other words, it's E.E.E. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend_and_extinguish) all over again. The only way to counter such underhanded anti-competitive business practices is to be the best in reality, and let that reality slowly sink into these companies that take part in these practices. It has leaked out that Microsoft has these kinds of agreements to silence or greatly downplay any "promotion" of Linux by companies like Dell, and I'm sure it explains the complete lack of mention or inclusion of the Linux client for the latest games UT3 and Quake Wars from any main website, advertisement, or promotion.


Spot on, dogadh. Microsoft is all too happy to make a common API and common evironment for developers. Of course it has to be on a MS platform tho. Grr.

So aside from OpenGL and WXWidgets, what else is needed exactly for creating a set of common APIs that would allow programs to be fully or much more cross-platform? Do you know?


Eeeehhh too many distros. Why can't one use Ubuntu for gaming? Instead of making up a whole new OS and support-line, why not just make a package which installs all the gaming stuff, and throw it into the repository?

Thank you. Instead of different distros, how about simply using different packages, and package sets. When installing Ubuntu, you could make it so a package set for Mythbuntu, or Xubuntu, or whatnot was installed, so if you're using the CD it could download and install those differences. Then, you could offer a DVD that could have the most common packages on it, etc etc. But please, for the sake of all that is Linux, make it a package and theme set if you want, not a completely separate "distro". Same goes for the kernel, wouldn't it be nice if instead of having to recompile the thing, if you could simply throw switches on or off, or disconnect modules in order to modify it? Sure, recompilation may give you a little bit more speed in some cases, but making it more modular and configurable would be nice too.


Any discussion is valid, per se, but it pays to do some research if it's gonna lead anywhere and not just waste everyones time. Some starting points: Has the subject been up before? What was the outcome? Why? Has something changed since then? What, if so? How does that affect the situation? So, what can we do now, that wasn't viable before?

Maybe you don't know, but they do, and as do I. You could know too, if you researched it. It's not like the company would automatically have more free sales by making the descision.

Any cross-platform solution, no matter how good, will never be better than say Java: write once, debug everywhere. Computers and software are simply just too complex for anything else. There will be subtle (and not so subtle) differences that needs to be found and addressed.

That costs a lot of money. Testing, QA, Linux knowledgable people, machines, time, etc. Then there's support. Same thing again. Oh, what's that? You can do without support, just give us the game? That has happened, and is generally a bad deal for the company.

You see, if they don't release the game on Linux, nobody much cares or singles them out. But if they release anything with problems, they are gonna get a lot of bad press, and if there is no support, even more so. "Game Company X doesn't care about Linux users!" on Slashdot. You know the drill. So, in fact, it's a better deal to not release it at all unless doing it all the way and properly.

Another case for testing/QA/etc: Multiplayer. That MUST work and work the same on all platforms. Each platform is a huge cost.

I could go on forever with reasons why this isn't just free money and more customers. The game companies today know these things, and it isn't that they don't know about Linux or the user base. Today just about anyone in IT has a pretty good idea of that market, because it's in the news all the time and they have already looked into it and done the math.

The customers are few, by the way. There aren't many gamers and even fewer that are prepared to pay. Petitions have been tried before, but by all means, please try it again. Predicted result: not very many, and when double checked, only 10% actually meant they will pay, the rest said so to support their platform of choice. Again.

Want to actually, really, truly get anywhere with this? Research. What is the actual situation, what is the facts, not only "I think it should work like...", then see what can be done to change that, actual, real situation.

Wishful thinking gets us nowhere. Facts and practical measures gets us forward...

You think Java is the only fully cross-platform solution? I hope you're wrong, but if you're right, I hope Java figures out how to use the native machine more directly and powerfully. A fully-3D high end game running in Java? *shudder* Unless it uses the native machine's OpenGL or Direct3D APIs or interfaces with the graphics drivers and hardware itself, it's going to run damn slow. Otherwise, if they overcome these problems and I start seeing actual "heavyweight" programs like 3D games using Java, and that truly is possible, then hey, go Java! Just make sure to make yourself completely open source so you can get bug fixes and features and improvements faster. ;) What about just creating some more APIs though that can be used by any OS? Wouldn't that be basically the same thing as Java, except much simpler and faster?

Also, support for Linux isn't a problem, there are lots of companies that would be willing. Support is, after all, one of the major ways open source makes money...but you have to have the program created before you can make money from supporting it.


What we need is some development/publishing company to stand up and really commit to Linux. They need to be willing to risk the expense stoffe described and actually support the platform fully. Unfortunately, that will never happen as long as there are only a handful of us who use Linux and want to game on it.

That would be awesome. Fortunately, Linux is doing better and the more it chips away at the Microsoft block, the more companies will start thinking about making their programs for it. More Linux adoption, period, is what is needed in general to propel company's interests in it more. Easy to program for, more programs and games, cross-platform, user-friendly as well as geek-friendly, those are all things that will excel Linux adoption, it's a catch22, you already know all this...

So, this discussion should really be about what major things, if any, can be done to really change the landscape for Linux to allow quicker adoption. I still think the more cross-platform APIs topic may have been an interesting place to start, so IMO is more ways to fund game creation, and more user-friendliness and programs for Linux in general.

stoffe
December 19th, 2007, 06:30 PM
Woa. Lots of stuff there Yfrwlf, and a few misunderstandings, at least IMO:

* There is no lack of API or engines today. Tools also for the most part. Unless you are trying to run a completely free software studio, in which case your choices are limited. Lots and lots of the large games out there *today* are built using these engines and tools! Lack of API is not in any way a reason there is a lack of Linux games, it's all about the market. So that part is already fixed.
* Wine should be integrated, but fixed first. Including it today would raise expectations that will not be fulfilled. A large majority of apps and games (try any at random) does NOT work. Many won't even install. That would give exactly the wrong impression.
* Java was an illustration, especially of the futile hope that many got when it first arrived, that when you write it once it will just work everywhere. No toolkit has ever done that and I predict that they never will, because of complexity. But again, see my first point. Generally, this is not the problem, consider it fixed.
* I'd like to see your support business case for games. Support making money in open source is not even the same word as what is meant by support for games, open source or not. Consider who the customer is in each case and what the business model is. But: if you actually have a workable case, people would be very interested. For real.

PS. About off- or on-topic, judging from the title of the thread, anything that brings games to Ubuntu is on topic. I personally think that the only way is to bring the gamers first, because anything else is business suicide, and without the business there will not be many of the popular games ported. One of the things that I think is a must for the gamers are bringing the old games with them. Gamers own a LOT of games (boxed or pirated) and asking them to leave them behind is like asking anyone to leave all their music when they switch to Ubuntu. Not gonna happen. DS.

ssugrim
December 20th, 2007, 06:23 AM
Personally I think that transgaming has the market model down for gaming on any pc.

It's really simple, make it subscription based. You want this game to work well on HP-AUX, you and all of you HP-AUX friends to suscribe , and then vote for HP-AUX support.

If all the game companies said "if we get critical mass of subscribers, the 5$ subscription fees will pay for a Dev team to port it to the OS of your choosing", this thread would be moot. Every subscriber would get what they want, their game on their OS.

Those Transgaming guys really have it figured out, a very creative way to make money on the opensource model, and a very good and popular product.

Wow runs faster on cedega than it does it windows on the exact same hard ware (I've tested this empirically :)

cogadh
December 20th, 2007, 07:16 AM
OMG, horrible idea. Cedega and other subscription based software are a waste of money, a complete scam. For your $5 a month you get the software plus any updates. What happens if there are no updates during a subscription year? You're out $60 and you can still only run half the games that Windows runs (plus you get to look forward to more monthly payments). What if it goes for another year or more without an update? How much money would you be willing to fork over before the subscription becomes a waste? If your subscription expires or you cancel it after the three month minimum and then the software gets updated, you don't get the update. You are stuck with out of date software that can't run all the games you want it to, unless you are willing to fork over another three month minimum to re-subscribe. How many times are you willing to pay for the same piece of software?

The subscription model is the worst idea anyone has ever come up with and I can't believe Transgaming has gotten so many people to fall for it. Especially considering the only advantages Cedega has over Wine (which is free) are a nice GUI and better support for copy protection.

stoffe
December 20th, 2007, 03:19 PM
Cedega is not open source, even though they started out with the WINE code base once. And it does not use the "traditional" open source support model, either. The "real" one is taking money to make sure things work, this case is taking money with all bets off.

They don't provide any support in the real sense. If your game doesn't work, there is no guarantees. If the game breaks servers, you will be banned or similar, and no refund available. In short: the game is not ported, not supported, not official, and not really tested. If it works, fine, if it doesn't... you're screwed.

It's an ok stop-gap measure for some, but it is not even close to a real solution. And it doesn't translate at all to getting games as first class citizens on free platforms, sorry.

Yfrwlf
December 20th, 2007, 07:25 PM
cogadh and stoffe, you're right that there are problems with the model but it's an attempt at least, and hopefully the money has not been wasted and is being put to good use.

To counter this business model and current models in general with my own possible remedy, I'll also explain to stoffe what my solution is exactly. I don't know if it'll work, but I believe that if all the loose ends could be fixed, it could be the solution that combines the open source with the closed source models, and solves major problems in each.

The problem with closed source is that you're paying for something that is closed source. ;) It comes with a tangle of restrictions, I'm sure I don't need to explain all the crazy EULA and license restrictions that most commercial programs have now days. "You can only use this software while juggling 5 bowling balls on Tuesday mornings while wearing boxing gloves." The "solution" this provides though is the same "channel" that open source cannot normally use. Commercial software is withheld from you until you pay for it's development to basically force consumers to pay for development. A lot of it also goes to pay for executive Ferraris I'm sure. Software companies make an insane profit many times. Is that bad? Well, it's a waste to a degree certainly, when you could have paid for more development instead, but if people are willing to pay for it at that price, whatever. Open source software gets it's revenue stream from support and advertising, among other things. Linux is really inter-connected in a sense because any success in one area means success for the platform as a whole, which means success for everything that uses it basically, just like if a Wii game developer makes a great game, other developers are aided by having the platform made more popular. Getting back to the model though...

The open source development way is great, it allows anyone to take part and fix it, it allows generosity as well as financial development to be put into it, but again, support after-the-fact is it's main paid support revenue stream so full-time developers aren't as common as they could be if they had an additional method of support, while closed source is financial support before-the-fact. Cedega, for example, tries to be both. It asks for money up front, but wants to apply that for support which comes after, and leaves you in the middle, hoping that there will be a connection between your money and the support you will hopefully get, with no solid assurances.

Imagine if you could combine the models together and get rid of the problems of each. Imagine paying for software that exists now, knowing what it's like before you pay for it, but unlike normal closed source software it has incredible benefits for you. It's completely open source allowing a community to do what they want with it, surround it, change it, improve it, hack it, make mods and add-ons and anything else they'd like to all without the permission of some legal god, meaning you will all actually own the software you paid for. Not only will you be able to do with it what you'd like, but so will everyone else, meaning you help yourself and the communities, too.

Getting to the point, it's communities of developers, gamers and computer users, governments, companies, and any kind of organizations coming together and agreeing that they want software X, and giving them a way to get it by voicing their needs and providing an agreement between developers and them that they will release their software under an open source license and develop for them in exchange for a certain price. It seems to me that even with the Internet, there is a ridiculous lack of cooperation that could be formed to go around the old ways of program creation. Why aren't we all working together to get the things we want, like the open source way, but do it with full-time developers who need a paycheck to pay rent? The name may be a little silly, but I came up with ODN (Open Development Network) and made a website that's been mostly down due to lack of interest, but I've put it back up for the time being. A lot of users seemed interested though, so I simply need to get a project page working again and find a few knowledgeable, interested web developers to help me create the website, because the website has to be a solidified system that will bring users and developers together to accomplish this. There are lots and lots of interesting (to me) facets of this, but let me explain my vision for you:

You sit in front of your TV and turn on your Linux (or any OS-based) console, or sit at your computer and check out ODN (let's stick with that for now). Current projects are presented in a possibly interesting manner and their progress. You can check them out and see media (movies, pictures, artwork, etc) of their progress and of the project. You can also see completed projects as well, and submit suggestions for new projects. These project ideas may come from anyone, including organizations and businesses like I've mentioned before. Developers also visit the site and can organize into teams if they are interested in the possible creation of a project. Now, there are a few ways which I've thought of for paying and for determining if a project can succeed by attempting to determine interest. "Voting", and amusingly enough, "voting with your wallet". In order for developers to be assured that they will get paid for their work, and in order for users to also be assured that they will get the software they wanted and not be scammed, a project can be started at any time but if wanted, only when there is enough votes of interest. Aside from just interest, and to avoid the problem of false claims as well as to protect the user, they can pay for "points". These points allow ODN to avoid being an escrow service. You could allow the points to always be removed, or you could make them fixed after a certain point, or completely fixed, as long as there was a way to make sure they would be returned if the goals of the project failed to be met. I believe that a safe way could be come up with that assured users and developers simultaneously, and a good development team could find many ways of assuring users of the quality of their software. Once the development was complete, ODN could review the game to make sure the goals were met and that a certain level of quality was achieved. At that point, if the payment requirements of the project had been met, ODN would pay the the developer(s) from the money they got from the users, divided in the way agreed upon by the team in conjunction with ODN if necessary to make sure all was kept fair. That's a lot better than simple donations IMO because you know for sure where your money is going. I'm all for donations, don't get me wrong, but just like giving to someone asking for money on the street, you can't be completely sure if that money is going to buy alcohol or not, so giving them help that you can be sure of is best. If the payment requirements had not been met, the game would not be released until they had, which by the way would be just fine with GPLed software, I've checked. Also, you could make it so after the project reached it's payment point, you could have any subsequent payments lower the price for other users who have paid, giving them back some of their "points". You could have the payments be fixed, or you could make any sized payment.

Basically, I want to figure out a way to create trust, accomplish development, and give the users what they really want, open source software that allows them to be free. If anyone here is interested in helping out with such a project and could perhaps help with legalities and the PHP/CSS/HTML or content management systems that could be used to set up such a website, please let me know. An idea I had for the website layout ended up looking somewhat similar to CNR's website (http://www.cnr.com/).

I think a console would be pretty neat though, based on Linux, allowing you to play the games on your computer as well, giving Microsoft and their Windows OS and Xbox console a run for their money. Imagine being able to surf through projects with a nice layout and keeping informed of project status and goings on and watching media and being able to pay for projects from there, as well as being able to download all the existing games for Linux. Speaking of which, you could just say all projects need to use APIs and such that are cross-platform for ODN, but for the "porting effort", however much effort would be required for that, you could have those projects be sub-projects perhaps, or even separate projects, or you could just let anyone port it once it's been released. Making it all be cross-platform would allow it to be as big as possible reaching the widest possible audience and making those among them wonder why they are sticking to closed proprietary platforms to begin with and giving them less of a reason to at the same time. Regardless, it will be clear what you're paying for exactly before you commit to, or pay for, some software. The website is here (http://www.opendevelopmentnetwork.org) but it's a little old and definitely needs a lot of work but it's not any kind of demo of the real website, it's just a CMS for making the real website. Any way, I just really need help from others to really get it rolling as I'm new to PHP and such.

There are many more facets to all of this functioning, several of which are talked about on ODN, and I'd love to hear and discuss anyone's ideas about it all or ways to allow more software to be made for Linux in general.

PS: Yes, I know about bounty projects, but this is a massive extension of such a concept, and it is collaborative on a level far beyond what a single bounty is.

molom
December 20th, 2007, 11:49 PM
Already been suggested and is completely unnecessary. Everything you want to be installed by default is easily installed manually in regular Ubuntu. Everything you want to not include can just as easily be removed manually. Not to mention, some of those items, especially the abandonware games, have licensing constraints that prevent them from being distributed with an OS.

Besides, is there a "Microsoft Windows Gamer's Edition"? No, so why should there be a separate gaming version of Ubuntu? Games should just work on the OS, no matter what edition it is (as long as it is not an old and out of date OS). Generally speaking, native games do just work on Ubuntu, so again, why would you need a different gamer's edition to do the same things that the regular edition already does?

Making a gamer's edition wouldn't solve the problem of the pitiful lack of AAA games on Linux anyway. It would just be yet another distribution that can only play a few lackluster games, nothing more. What we need is some development/publishing company to stand up and really commit to Linux. They need to be willing to risk the expense stoffe described and actually support the platform fully. Unfortunately, that will never happen as long as there are only a handful of us who use Linux and want to game on it.

Then there wouldn't be a point in releasing Ubuntu Studio. What is your point? Windows isn't open source and it doesn't believe in it so there are only like 5 current editions of Windows Vista. Linux has hundreds of OS's and derivatives and thats why it's possible to have a gamers edition. If someone is willing to do that to have it as a hobby, why not? I never knew how to use wine. So the edition could have a very user friendly way to tell you how to install commercial games on Linux.

Yfrwlf
December 20th, 2007, 11:55 PM
Then there wouldn't be a point in releasing Ubuntu Studio. What is your point? Windows isn't open source and it doesn't believe in it so there are only like 5 current editions of Windows Vista. Linux has hundreds of OS's and derivatives and thats why it's possible to have a gamers edition. If someone is willing to do that to have it as a hobby, why not? I never knew how to use wine. So the edition could have a very user friendly way to tell you how to install commercial games on Linux.

Perhaps, or you could just make Wine easier to use from Ubuntu. All you need to do is install it through Add/Remove, associate it to open EXEs, and read winehq.com for any specific configurations and problems you may encounter with different applications.

cogadh
December 21st, 2007, 01:11 AM
Then there wouldn't be a point in releasing Ubuntu Studio. What is your point? Windows isn't open source and it doesn't believe in it so there are only like 5 current editions of Windows Vista. Linux has hundreds of OS's and derivatives and thats why it's possible to have a gamers edition. If someone is willing to do that to have it as a hobby, why not? I never knew how to use wine. So the edition could have a very user friendly way to tell you how to install commercial games on Linux.
I don't think there is a reason for Ubuntu Studio to exist as a separate distribution. Everything that you get with Studio can be installed very easily into the regular Ubuntu. Honestly, Studio should be northing more than an installable package set, rather than a standalone distro. Pretty much the only "Ubuntu satellite distribution" I think is worth the effort is MythBuntu, as it does make the whole process of turning a regular PC into a media center much easier.

The different "versions" of Vista are not actually different at all, each one just has more useless crap than the next. The only real "version" difference is Home vs. Pro, just like it was with XP.

I never said it wasn't possible to have a gamer's edition, I just don't see the need for it. If someone wants to make that their hobby, that is their business, I just don't think it is really worth the effort.

As for using Wine, I definitely have to agree with you there. Somewhere on these forums is frustrated rant I wrote a while back, complaining about the pitiful state of Wine documentation. I have since calmed down a little and actually learned how to use Wine through trial and error. It was definitely not easy to do, but it can be done.

However, it wouldn't require a gamer's edition distribution to make Wine easier to use. For one thing, Wine needs to be finished. Far too much of it is still incomplete for it to be a truly viable gaming solution. Also, it might be helpful if Wine had better GUI based tools. Winecfg is fine for setting up Wine, but something to make installations and running applications a less cludgy process would be nice. In theory, it really wouldn't take much to do something like that. I could probably throw something together with my limited Python skills. It would work, but it would probably be ugly as sin. Hmmmm.... I think I might have to look into that...

jekinney
December 21st, 2007, 04:49 AM
My 2 cents......

Yes I agree, Linux would take over the world.

But, with rising costs to make games, all the consoles, and pc. If you read post about a certian game that was ported to pc and consoles..... It's not the same game play on 360 and pc....

Games for Windows.... Search and read about that program. In short, Microsoft gives the DX use to developers, and pays for advertising. With few rescrictions(must beable to use 360 controler on pc, etc). OpenGL will port to linux. But most Graphic engines are coded to use DX.
Wine lets you use DX, but with old version of windows(in a nut shell). Those guys working on Wine, work their tails off, but it is a work around.
Untill we united and send mail, e-mail to the game developers and prove we will buy enough games to cover the loss of money from using Games for Windows, we will continue to have the problems..

My 2 cents only.... No offense to anyone.

One more quick comment: Why do alot of people blame Bill?? Any one really think Bill does code anymore? He is a CEO of a multi-billion $$ company. He has bent to the share holders and board long ago. Any one thing he was typing away, helping build XP, or Vista?????

molom
December 21st, 2007, 06:41 AM
My 2 cents......

Yes I agree, Linux would take over the world.

But, with rising costs to make games, all the consoles, and pc. If you read post about a certian game that was ported to pc and consoles..... It's not the same game play on 360 and pc....

Games for Windows.... Search and read about that program. In short, Microsoft gives the DX use to developers, and pays for advertising. With few rescrictions(must beable to use 360 controler on pc, etc). OpenGL will port to linux. But most Graphic engines are coded to use DX.
Wine lets you use DX, but with old version of windows(in a nut shell). Those guys working on Wine, work their tails off, but it is a work around.
Untill we united and send mail, e-mail to the game developers and prove we will buy enough games to cover the loss of money from using Games for Windows, we will continue to have the problems..

My 2 cents only.... No offense to anyone.

One more quick comment: Why do alot of people blame Bill?? Any one really think Bill does code anymore? He is a CEO of a multi-billion $$ company. He has bent to the share holders and board long ago. Any one thing he was typing away, helping build XP, or Vista?????

You do have a point about us uniting and sending a message to game developers.

I don't think people don't blame Bill Gates. People just hate him for being the CEO of Microsoft, nobody really blames him for anything and I don't think anyone has anything against him for being successful. Bill is more of a businessman than a coder. I find him a funny person to laugh at, especially that time he got hit with a pie ( http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8474345765531799467 ).

Trampis
December 21st, 2007, 06:59 AM
I don't play many games, but I was curious to see how well a shooter game would run under Feisty, so I downloaded the latest version of ALIEN ARENA and installed it.
It runs really well under Ubuntu.

Maybe you'd like to give it a try.
You can download the complete game here, at Red Planet Arena.

http://red.planetarena.org/

I have actually been struggling to find a FPS that would work well under ubuntu (with or without wine) I originally bought F.E.A.R only to find out that there are no how tos and no one has every gotten it to run successfully. I hear quake runs pretty well under wine, I am currently fiddling about with Doom 3's linux distro to mixed success.

However to to topic at hand I dont think gaming on ubuntu is going to make it take over the world I think that the "mundane" things like word processing and internet surfing will make your PC user get ubuntu. However availability would also help world domination, the majority of PCs are sold work and school ready with the newest windows and no one says anything to anyone about how great an alternative ubuntu is. I am a student first and a gamer second and I have been able to do everything i need for school as well as not having vista getting in the way. The only times i mess up my computer is when the games are concerned.

hikaricore
December 21st, 2007, 07:29 AM
Just fyi there are literally dozens of Quake ports for linux.
They should all run a bit better than running the game through WINE.

If you can't find a native FPS there's something seriously wrong with where you're looking.
Unless of course you mean a single player FPS. Then you're limited to a few titles such as Quake (any version), Doom (any version), and Return to Castle Wolfenstein. There are more but I can't name them off the top of my head.

Yfrwlf
December 21st, 2007, 11:25 AM
However, it wouldn't require a gamer's edition distribution to make Wine easier to use. For one thing, Wine needs to be finished. Far too much of it is still incomplete for it to be a truly viable gaming solution. Also, it might be helpful if Wine had better GUI based tools. Winecfg is fine for setting up Wine, but something to make installations and running applications a less cludgy process would be nice. In theory, it really wouldn't take much to do something like that. I could probably throw something together with my limited Python skills. It would work, but it would probably be ugly as sin. Hmmmm.... I think I might have to look into that...

I thought there already was one or a few Wine GUIs aside from Cedega that would do the little configuration tweaks required by some games for you. I think Wine by default should perhaps include such a feature. It knows you're trying to run program X so it needs configurations y and z.


My 2 cents......

Yes I agree, Linux would take over the world.

But, with rising costs to make games, all the consoles, and pc. If you read post about a certian game that was ported to pc and consoles..... It's not the same game play on 360 and pc....

Games for Windows.... Search and read about that program. In short, Microsoft gives the DX use to developers, and pays for advertising. With few rescrictions(must beable to use 360 controler on pc, etc). OpenGL will port to linux. But most Graphic engines are coded to use DX.
Wine lets you use DX, but with old version of windows(in a nut shell). Those guys working on Wine, work their tails off, but it is a work around.
Untill we united and send mail, e-mail to the game developers and prove we will buy enough games to cover the loss of money from using Games for Windows, we will continue to have the problems..

My 2 cents only.... No offense to anyone.

One more quick comment: Why do alot of people blame Bill?? Any one really think Bill does code anymore? He is a CEO of a multi-billion $$ company. He has bent to the share holders and board long ago. Any one thing he was typing away, helping build XP, or Vista?????

Yes, MS has a massive campaign to push Windows-only platforms on developers. By paying for certain things or forcing certain things through their agreements with any companies that want to use their tools or perhaps even be allowed to put the Games for Windows stuff on their products, they must bend to their will and that means conforming to their platform and being locked in. I'm really surprised Epic and id have even made a Linux version this time around because of all of that, though their support for Linux has certainly decreased since the last times, at least for Epic.

Microsoft wants to divide us and pay a little extra to wash away any competition, any knowledge of anything else but Windows. Fortunately alternatives exist and so do the communities surrounding them, but uniting and being able to find solutions to counter their marketing is imperative. That's why if we had a very visible website that was a collaborative center for working on games through full-time developers, giving all the Linux users and others interested in open source solutions an additional method to get the kind of software they want, it would be awesome...at least I think so, but I guess no one else read my idea or they think I'm crazy. Was too long perhaps. ;) Just imagine all the users and companies and organizations coming together to finally create a CAD substitute, or some educational software, or the photo manipulation program that everyone seems to want in place of the Gimp whatever that may be, or any of the other business/educational/government software that is wanted, as well as some advanced complex games. Offering a way for full-time programmers to do this would maybe actually give an additional way to allow Linux or cross-platform API programming to be a career path.

Bill has and always will be just a businessman. Really good at backstabbing competition, absorbing it, blocking it, whatever he can do to make sure it benefits Microsoft. It's amazing really, a text book example of a monopoly, but there are many examples of that. So yes, he is responsible for Microsoft software sucking because Microsoft doesn't compete. Not in the fair way.

Apple, too. Their place in the universe is also controlled by Microsoft who has stock in their company, to make sure they don't get in the way and stay a side attraction.

weblordpepe
December 21st, 2007, 01:01 PM
This thread has started to repeat itself. People are saying the same things over & over again now. Basically there are more games out that work in linux than people here are generally aware. And MS puts money towards making sure games only work on Windows

imon9
December 21st, 2007, 01:36 PM
we could play games on linux... but the real thing to snatch the gamer community is this:

develop the ultamate open-source linux game (well, i supposed we can make the first few version to be cross-platform and slowly create incompability when the popularity soar :p hehehe, i know that is evil play, but hell, it will force a lot of gamers to switch to linux :p

btw, what's not attractive with open-source games? If it got great plot, and it is FREE, i don't see why gamers would be held back :)

open-source community may start coding great games!!! what excite me with open source game is that it can come with some SDK for developing our own character with it's own ability and skill/weapon. (SDK will imply the rules so that a character wont be too powerful and this will gives us some hard-core game coding.. this will take game play from mere entertainment to become more creative & perhaps help us nurture new generation of game coder (from young age :p)

molom
December 21st, 2007, 02:30 PM
we could play games on linux... but the real thing to snatch the gamer community is this:

develop the ultamate open-source linux game (well, i supposed we can make the first few version to be cross-platform and slowly create incompability when the popularity soar :p hehehe, i know that is evil play, but hell, it will force a lot of gamers to switch to linux :p

btw, what's not attractive with open-source games? If it got great plot, and it is FREE, i don't see why gamers would be held back :)

open-source community may start coding great games!!! what excite me with open source game is that it can come with some SDK for developing our own character with it's own ability and skill/weapon. (SDK will imply the rules so that a character wont be too powerful and this will gives us some hard-core game coding.. this will take game play from mere entertainment to become more creative & perhaps help us nurture new generation of game coder (from young age :p)

When people hear that the game is free, people get a general idea that the game is rubbish, because most ultimate games aren't for free and rather more like $80 american dollars. And plus advertising for the game would cost too much.

stoffe
December 21st, 2007, 03:21 PM
To prove that there are enough gamers willing to buy - which is eaxctly what I've been talking about - there must actually be enough gamers willing to buy. That is not the case today, at least that is the experience of game companies trying to have a Linux version. The ones that still do it, like ID, do it because they want to, not because there is any money. Few companies think like that.

Of course, if they (and I) are wrong about the numbers, feel free to prove it. Today everything points to that there just isn't enough actual buyers, no matter how much those that do exist would like to buy the games.

So again, user base is key. Everything else already exists.

stoffe
December 21st, 2007, 03:26 PM
When people hear that the game is free, people get a general idea that the game is rubbish, because most ultimate games aren't for free and rather more like $80 american dollars. And plus advertising for the game would cost too much.

Nope, not at all. That is not a problem, especially today when what is cool is mainly decided on Youtube. ;)

It's just an enormous effort, and generally people don't have the time. It's also very hard still to get quality artwork and sound for this kind of project, even if there occasionally is enough programmers to get something solid going.

cogadh
December 21st, 2007, 03:29 PM
I thought there already was one or a few Wine GUIs aside from Cedega that would do the little configuration tweaks required by some games for you. I think Wine by default should perhaps include such a feature. It knows you're trying to run program X so it needs configurations y and z.
There are apps like Wine Doors that make some things easier by scripting certain actions for you, but I'm talking about a graphical front end that doesn't necessarily take the actions for you, but gives you the tools to make those manual actions easier.

For example, creating "bottles" (i.e. alternate .wine directories) is relatively easy to do from the terminal, once you learn how to do it, but it would be much easier if there was a GUI that allowed you to just click a button, enter a name and create your bottle. The GUI would be able to launch winecfg for each created bottle to configure it, have functions to import native DLL files and of course, assist with installing apps in each bottle.

Launching applications could also be a lot easier and more customizable. Think of something along the lines of the Steam platform; a list of installed applications with customizable launch options (windowed/fullscreen, resolution, separate X session/current X session, executable arguments, etc.) and a single click launch button. The user wouldn't have to worry about what bottle they installed the app in, all that stuff would be handled by the font end app.

I guess my point is, the biggest complaint most people have about Wine is it is so hard to use. Personally, I think a lot of it has to do with the average user's irrational fear of the terminal, but, even if that is the case, it is no less a valid complaint. PCs have evolved past the text interface days, the average user does not want that any more, they want point and click ease of use. All we would need is a GUI front end for Wine that is capable of doing all the things you can already do with Wine through the terminal.

Something as simple as that would go a long way towards giving people a viable reason to switch from Windows to Linux. Of course, once we get the users on Linux, then the games will follow us here. An easy to use and more functional Wine bypasses the whole "chicken and egg" problem we seem to have with games and Linux, as it would allow average users the ability to play their Windows games during the transitional period, then switch to playing native games, once we have sufficient Linux users to justify the development of AAA commercial games for Linux.

K.Mandla
December 21st, 2007, 03:35 PM
I really mean what the title says. The fact that I can not play any game I want on Ubuntu is the only thing that prevents me from make the permanent switch on my desktop. My company owns VGPRO.com and we have a lot of contact with other gamers. Their opinions are all the same. "We'd switch to Ubuntu if only we could game!"

So, why aren't more resources being devoted to finding a free solution to the gaming problem on Ubuntu and every other linux distro?
I think you forgot the first lesson: Linux isn't Windows.

If you want to play Windows games, you should be using Windows. If you want to play Linux games, you should be using Linux.

There's no problem with gaming in Linux (http://kmandla.wordpress.com/2007/04/06/the-problem-with-linux-is-there-are-no-games/), only with people who expect to play Windows games in Linux.

cogadh
December 21st, 2007, 03:48 PM
I have to strongly disagree with that and I must say, that is an incredibly close-minded attitude about gaming on Linux. Yes there are games for Linux, some of them are even good games. The problem is all of the top shelf PC games that everyone wants to play are only on Windows. We are not asking for Windows games to be playable on Linux, we are asking for those Windows games to stop being "Windows games". They should just be PC games that can be played on any OS.

Yfrwlf
December 21st, 2007, 05:05 PM
we could play games on linux... but the real thing to snatch the gamer community is this:

develop the ultamate open-source linux game (well, i supposed we can make the first few version to be cross-platform and slowly create incompability when the popularity soar :p hehehe, i know that is evil play, but hell, it will force a lot of gamers to switch to linux :p

btw, what's not attractive with open-source games? If it got great plot, and it is FREE, i don't see why gamers would be held back :)

open-source community may start coding great games!!! what excite me with open source game is that it can come with some SDK for developing our own character with it's own ability and skill/weapon. (SDK will imply the rules so that a character wont be too powerful and this will gives us some hard-core game coding.. this will take game play from mere entertainment to become more creative & perhaps help us nurture new generation of game coder (from young age :p)

First off, it'd be hard to create a really complex game that was only for Linux because there isn't one. Not yet. Not enough development for Linux yet. There are several that are quite nice don't get me wrong, but it's true that their complexity isn't anywhere near commercial which leads currently, or leads in the minds of many gamers at least, because complexity in no way means a good game. It certainly adds spice to older game concepts though, and having open source versions of current games would be incredibly nice or even *gasp* new games with new concepts. So, my point is if you want to make a game right now then you need widespread support of all platform users, so you need cross-platform. Also, it's just nicer.

Gamers would come, you're right, if it's built. Problem is getting there, and getting there at or surpassing the speed of traditional closed-source game creation to provide the "new fix" for gamers.

New, faster ways of creating game content would be fantastic and I predict their further rise. For example there are several game creation kits for doing so. Making it easier to create games while leaving it modular and adaptable to new features and content I think would be really fantastic. I'm sure the game studios aren't as enthusiastic about their uprise though and for the time being their abilities will always lag behind new games on the market.


When people hear that the game is free, people get a general idea that the game is rubbish, because most ultimate games aren't for free and rather more like $80 american dollars. And plus advertising for the game would cost too much.

You're right that this is one stereotype that exists to some degree, but it can certainly be quickly demolished with the existence of something to prove otherwise, like Firefox, OpenOffice, and Linux in general, but for games instead. Besides, my project would be pay, but users would find out that it doesn't matter how it's made to exist, the only thing that matters is it's quality.

and yes, YouTube and other media showing off it's "coolness" would really help.


To prove that there are enough gamers willing to buy - which is eaxctly what I've been talking about - there must actually be enough gamers willing to buy. That is not the case today, at least that is the experience of game companies trying to have a Linux version. The ones that still do it, like ID, do it because they want to, not because there is any money. Few companies think like that.

Of course, if they (and I) are wrong about the numbers, feel free to prove it. Today everything points to that there just isn't enough actual buyers, no matter how much those that do exist would like to buy the games.

So again, user base is key. Everything else already exists.

You sure you're not listening to companies that have a vested interest in protecting their Microsoft alliances? You have to realize that Dell and game companies do refrain from supporting Linux to keep their Microsoft discounts. This is a fact, though obviously they don't try to make it public, but even if you didn't believe this, I don't think the cost of making a Linux version is great especially if they use cross-platform APIs. Do you honestly think that a few changes even compares to the effort in all the other parts of the actual game?

Of course, a huge part of the problem is Windows being forced on consumers to begin with, and it should really be unbundled or an option always existing for not purchasing it or getting something else.

So do you believe there is any other solution aside from Wine then?


Nope, not at all. That is not a problem, especially today when what is cool is mainly decided on Youtube. ;)

It's just an enormous effort, and generally people don't have the time. It's also very hard still to get quality artwork and sound for this kind of project, even if there occasionally is enough programmers to get something solid going.

Which is why finding new ways for paid development for Linux or cross-platform games would be great, one being more Linux adoption, another being more companies making that decision, and another being funding open source development to gain the support of the market who is interested in having that kind of freedom and willing to pay for it (me, and I'm sure others as well).


I have to strongly disagree with that and I must say, that is an incredibly close-minded attitude about gaming on Linux. Yes there are games for Linux, some of them are even good games. The problem is all of the top shelf PC games that everyone wants to play are only on Windows. We are not asking for Windows games to be playable on Linux, we are asking for those Windows games to stop being "Windows games". They should just be PC games that can be played on any OS.

Right, or quite simply we want games to be cross-platform so you can use the OS of your choice. It is a problem that those games are built for Windows only, and Wine helps solve that issue, but as far as more Linux games there are several things to increase them as we've all mentioned several times.


This thread has started to repeat itself. People are saying the same things over & over again now. Basically there are more games out that work in linux than people here are generally aware. And MS puts money towards making sure games only work on Windows

Tell me about it, it's getting old. I presented my solution to it all, and I still think it may be possible to create friendlier cross-platform libraries to make sure they beat Microsoft's SDKs and compete on that front, but I'm no developer so I have no idea.

Still waiting for anyone to respond to my proposed solution...maybe it sucks though, but I'm going to keep working on it any way. ;)

Shinbu-Otaku
December 21st, 2007, 05:27 PM
It will be difficult to try and convince the professional game developers to develop games for Linux, because the philosophy behind Linux is free software (as in free speech) and some Linux users believe that all software should be open source. Dont't get me wrong: not because they favor piracy or something, but because this is the philosophy behid Linux.

On the other hand, professional game developers are trying to make money. So...

Or am I wrong? What do you think on this?

that is a very good point, although recently i have heard of a few 'Made for Linux' logos going on the front of game boxes, i think the new unreal tournament is one of them. This will hopefully make more games developers realise that computers arent just windows, and money can be made from any OS, just look at Mac, its not windows but still has propriety software made for it.

Once lots of paid-for software comes to linux, bill gates should fall to his knees (bit of wishful thinkin there lol)

RezoApio
December 21st, 2007, 05:27 PM
Take it as a publicity if you want but please go have a look at Eschalon Book I from www.basiliskgames.com

They have made a multi OS Old school RPG game. In order to favor the widely oversized Windows gamer community they start by releasing the Windows first and then the Mac version and now the Linux version.

This is a paying game under Linux, why would everything be free on the ubuntu world ?
If people on this thread really want a killer app in the Linux world, give a try to this game and then buy it if you like it.

If enough of us buy the game then we will start to have more indies going over to linux world and we will be free of racketware ;-)

So let's make ubuntu rules the world ;-)

Rezo
RPG fanatic willing to have more and more Linux games

K.Mandla
December 22nd, 2007, 12:36 AM
I have to strongly disagree with that and I must say, that is an incredibly close-minded attitude about gaming on Linux. Yes there are games for Linux, some of them are even good games. The problem is all of the top shelf PC games that everyone wants to play are only on Windows. We are not asking for Windows games to be playable on Linux, we are asking for those Windows games to stop being "Windows games". They should just be PC games that can be played on any OS.
Point taken; I may have responded a bit too tersely there. Still, I think if there are top-shelf games available only to Windows, then there's no guilt attached to using Windows to play them. I apply the same logic to Photoshop or Office; if it's a Windows program and you want to use it, use Windows. I don't see any fault in using an Xbox360 to play Halo 3, as someone else mentioned earlier. If that's what you want, use it.

I do tend to oversimplify things though. :???:

Yfrwlf
December 22nd, 2007, 01:37 AM
that is a very good point, although recently i have heard of a few 'Made for Linux' logos going on the front of game boxes, i think the new unreal tournament is one of them. This will hopefully make more games developers realise that computers arent just windows, and money can be made from any OS, just look at Mac, its not windows but still has propriety software made for it.

Once lots of paid-for software comes to linux, bill gates should fall to his knees (bit of wishful thinkin there lol)

It's true that more should be made but their point was that many who use Linux a) may need/want 'cheap' or 'free' and b) many want to stick with open source programs so they can be completely in control. For example, this Eschalon game that RezoApio links to, if I didn't like the story or certain levels or whatever I could change it, that's really awesome to be able to do. But any way, of course you can have closed source on Linux though and I hope we see more everything for Linux, even if closed source isn't the best for your money, at least it's something if nothing else exists.


Point taken; I may have responded a bit too tersely there. Still, I think if there are top-shelf games available only to Windows, then there's no guilt attached to using Windows to play them. I apply the same logic to Photoshop or Office; if it's a Windows program and you want to use it, use Windows. I don't see any fault in using an Xbox360 to play Halo 3, as someone else mentioned earlier. If that's what you want, use it.

I do tend to oversimplify things though. :???:

Exactly, if that's what you want...but some may prefer to be inside a different OS when and where possible, but sometimes they may not be able to. As a side note though, every time you buy a Windows game, I'm pretty sure most game companies are completely unaware if you were to play it on Linux instead, so buying it is usually "supporting" that platform. but whatever, there's only so much you can do as a consumer, you can mostly only work with what exists, otherwise you have to try to help stuff to exist which is much harder.


Take it as a publicity if you want but please go have a look at Eschalon Book I from www.basiliskgames.com

They have made a multi OS Old school RPG game. In order to favor the widely oversized Windows gamer community they start by releasing the Windows first and then the Mac version and now the Linux version.

I'm just wondering how I missed this one, must have hit Happy Penguin when I wasn't paying attention. How did you hear about it? It looks fairly decent, perhaps around 1998 graphics, which I'm OK with I play older games all the time. Will definitely try out the demo... I still play Diablo 2, Wizardry, some of the Ultimas, etc...D2 runs really nicely on Wine BTW, I still think it's addicting sometimes. =P

molom
December 22nd, 2007, 05:25 AM
I don't think one good game or the best game would ever be able to make someone move from Windows. It's kind of impossible for that to happen. The only thing you can do is make a contract with a big company like Sierra, Ea Games and probably even Microsoft Games. I think Halo has enough of an image to get people to change, but it's unlikey because it would be on the 360 anyway and what is the chance microsoft negotiating with Linux Businesses.

Wiebelhaus
December 22nd, 2007, 05:29 AM
I really mean what the title says. The fact that I can not play any game I want on Ubuntu is the only thing that prevents me from make the permanent switch on my desktop. My company owns VGPRO.com and we have a lot of contact with other gamers. Their opinions are all the same. "We'd switch to Ubuntu if only we could game!"

So, why aren't more resources being devoted to finding a free solution to the gaming problem on Ubuntu and every other linux distro?

My 20year Windows platform and gaming veteran who is an IT professional buddy says the same thing and means it.

I on the other hand have decided pc gaming is getting boring anyway and have picked up a console.

iammeagain
December 22nd, 2007, 06:19 AM
if ubuntu could run exe's it would most definatly take over:lolflag:

Then we would get viruses. :?

iammeagain
December 22nd, 2007, 06:22 AM
VM's can't run 3D accelerated graphics. VurtualBox is supposed to be able to with the next version, but AFAIK, none of the current versions can do that.

VMware does, http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=372928
I don't know what other games you could get to play successfully


***UPDATES***
***March 02 2007 - I am now recommending you use DirectX8.1 instead of 9. It seems to be alot more stable.***



Configure for Direct3D

Once Windows is installed we need to make it ready to play 3D games.
a) Start up Windows in the emulator and install the virtual drivers by clicking VM in the menu, then clicking 'Install VMWare Tools'.
This will pop up a windows installer that will emulate all your linux drivers and ask you to restart.
b) After it's restarted we need to download and install DirectX8.1 (2000, XP) (in the Windows emulation of course). DirectX9 will work but I found it to be unstable.
c) Now for the dangerous part. This has reportedly not worked for some, but it worked just fine for me.
Shut down your windows emulation, close out of VMware, and navigate to where it saves your virtual drive (should be /home/<uname>/vmware/Windows XP/). Look for the file with a .vmx extension. Open that file with gedit and add the following to the bottom:
Code:

mks.enable3d = "TRUE"
svga.vramSize = "67108864"
vmmouse.present = "FALSE"

Save the file, restart VMware, go to Edit-->Preferences-->Input, and uncheck all the cursor options. Apparently when 3D is running it wants to lock the mouse on the screen. That's ok, a simple ctrl+alt gives the mouse back to other applications.
Now, start up the emulated Windows again and once its loaded go to Start-->Run.
Type in 'dxdiag' and click OK.
Go over to the display tab and if you have Direct3D enabled, do a dance of joy, download Maple Story, install, and start playing.

If Direct3D still isnt enabled, or youre getting weird reactions, try removing the svga.vramSize = "67108864" line from the .vmx file.
If this doesnt work than its possible your Ubuntu installation isnt set up for 3D direct rendering. You'll have to resolve this issue first as described in the first steps above.
If that is not the case then you might have to wait for the team at VMware to further develop their Direct3D support.

cogadh
December 22nd, 2007, 05:34 PM
Old news ( in more ways than one, why are you resurrecting posts we made months ago? The conversation has moved way beyond this already).

VMWare can only do DX 7 and 8 and not very well (3D support is still only experimental). If you want to play really old games with a huge performance hit, then by all means, use a VM. Don't expect any game that was made after the release of DX 9 in 2002/2003 to work well at all. If you want to do any modern 3D gaming, VMs just can't do it, Wine does it slightly better and Windows does it best (unfortunately).

iammeagain
December 22nd, 2007, 06:36 PM
Old news ( in more ways than one, why are you resurrecting posts we made months ago? The conversation has moved way beyond this already).

VMWare can only do DX 7 and 8 and not very well (3D support is still only experimental). If you want to play really old games with a huge performance hit, then by all means, use a VM. Don't expect any game that was made after the release of DX 9 in 2002/2003 to work well at all. If you want to do any modern 3D gaming, VMs just can't do it, Wine does it slightly better and Windows does it best (unfortunately).

Sorry I was scanning through the old posts and missed that. I'm not much of a gamer so actually I don't mind playing old games, but i only feel a little performance hit with my vmware.

I have a random question could someone install OSX to vmware? you guys seem to know quite a bit. I like to be able to do stuff just because I can, I probably wouldn't get any use out of it I know.

Yfrwlf
December 22nd, 2007, 06:42 PM
VMware does, http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=372928
I don't know what other games you could get to play successfully

With VMWare Workstation 6 you can play games with partial 3D features, May Payne 2 for example I played and it was OK except everything was really shiny and I think the fog was missing. It's only partially implemented. I didn't know about VritualBox getting the same ability, that's awesome. :)

radlations
December 23rd, 2007, 07:44 AM
The games that are linux-only Suck. Someone dare to disagree with me.

hikaricore
December 23rd, 2007, 07:48 AM
The games that are linux-only Suck. Someone dare to disagree with me.


Give some examples of the linux only games you refer to otherwise I'll just consider you comment a pointless flame.

revanthedarth
December 23rd, 2007, 09:08 AM
(The games i refer may not be linux-only, don't blame me, i know that)
But come on, there are games that you can play with linux, and some of them really suck. I want to play RPGs, and what do i see? Action-RPGs like Nethack, Adonthell, angband etc. I want a real RPG. KotOR, NWN, Vampire the Masquerade, Arcanum, Fallout, Planescape:Torment, Baldur's Gate etc. But some of them aren't even playable with Wine.

But, would i make them linux only, if i was the lead programmer? No. I am currently making a 2D Role Playing Game (And i want it to be RPG, not like Diablo, Nethack etc.), and i want to support all the platforms. "Games for Linux" irritates me as much as "Games for Windows". That's why i don't use GLX.

But at the other hand, linux has good games too. Freecol, a Heroes-like game that i can't remember, lots of FPSs etc. Not what you need, if you use your PC for gaming only, but it will do the trick.

atomkarinca
December 23rd, 2007, 09:59 AM
I want to play RPGs, and what do i see? Action-RPGs like Nethack, Adonthell, angband etc. I want a real RPG. KotOR, NWN, Vampire the Masquerade, Arcanum, Fallout, Planescape:Torment, Baldur's Gate etc. But some of them aren't even playable with Wine.

I have looked up every game you've referred to here on Wine Application Database (http://appdb.winehq.org) and most of these games are gold and silver (if not platinum).


But, would i make them linux only, if i was the lead programmer? No.

This is the basic idea. Nobody wants to make those games linux-only. The games should be labelled as "pc-games" not "windows-games".

Xavieran
December 23rd, 2007, 11:20 AM
Originally Posted by revanthedarth
I want to play RPGs, and what do i see? Action-RPGs like Nethack, Adonthell, angband etc. I want a real RPG. KotOR, NWN, Vampire the Masquerade, Arcanum, Fallout, Planescape:Torment, Baldur's Gate etc. But some of them aren't even playable with Wine.

How dare you insult nethack!

Netack is *the* greatest game of all time!!!

EDIT:YIPPEEE my 100th post was about defending nethack!

cogadh
December 23rd, 2007, 04:15 PM
I want a real RPG. KotOR, NWN, Vampire the Masquerade, Arcanum, Fallout, Planescape:Torment, Baldur's Gate etc. But some of them aren't even playable with Wine.
KotOR runs in Wine
NWN has a Linux native client
Which Vampire? Redemption runs in Wine, Bloodlines does not
Arcanum runs in Wine
Fallout runs perfectly in Wine
Planescape will not work in Wine, it used to, but it doesn't anymore
Baldur's gate runs in Wine

So of all the RPGs you want to play, you could play all of them except one (possibly two) in Linux.

revanthedarth
December 23rd, 2007, 10:43 PM
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=2712 says otherwise about KotOR. PS:T doesn't work, yes. But what i meant was different. I meant that when i search for RPGs, i can't find ones like KotOR, NWN, VtM etc. I just want to see some real RPGs on Synaptic. (Again, i don't mean to see Fallout, Arcanum etc. But there aren't any free RPGs that i know of)

By the way, i didn't want to insult Nethack, i'm still playing it. But when i search for RPGs, i find ones like Nethack. That's what i'm upset at.

hikaricore
December 23rd, 2007, 11:44 PM
Generally you'll find much better titles for Linux outside of the Ubuntu repos than you will inside of them.

The Ubuntu repos or as you mentioned the GUI interface for apt - Synaptic, have a vast wealth of recent and dated software. However it is not the goal of Ubuntu to provided you with the latest and greatest games and a goal like this is still a pipedream, I suggest you visit some Linux gaming sites and search for something you'd be interested in on your own.

As for RPG games I can point out a couple interesting ones worth a look:
http://javacrpg.sourceforge.net/
http://www.allacrost.org/
http://annchienta.sourceforge.net/

I know there are dozens more of varying quality that one could find with a few simple searches, and don't judge a book by its cover, uber-graphics do not a good game make.

Oh and those Linux gaming sites I mentioned:

http://gaming.gwos.org/
http://freegamer.blogspot.com/
http://www.happypenguin.org/
http://www.linuxgames.com/
http://www.linux-gamers.net/
http://linuxgamingworld.com/
http://www.ubuntugames.org (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ubuntugames.org%2F&langpair=pt%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8)
http://www.holarse-linuxgaming.de (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.holarse-linuxgaming.de%2Fh2006%2Fspace%2Fstart&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8)
http://linuxemu.retrofaction.com/

http://www.getdeb.net/category.php?id=3

cogadh
December 24th, 2007, 01:42 AM
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=2712 says otherwise about KotOR.
This is one situation where I can say from personal experience that AppDB is wrong. KotOR was actually the first game I ever got running in Wine and I still play it and KotOR 2 through Wine all the time.

PS:T doesn't work, yes. But what i meant was different. I meant that when i search for RPGs, i can't find ones like KotOR, NWN, VtM etc. I just want to see some real RPGs on Synaptic. (Again, i don't mean to see Fallout, Arcanum etc. But there aren't any free RPGs that i know of)
As hikari already pointed out, the repositories are the wrong place to look for games, especially RPGs. In fact, I would say that the selection of games available in the repositories gives the absolute wrong impression of the kind of gaming that is available for Linux. Most of the games are old or out of date, have limited graphics, incomplete gameplay, or are little more than the Linux version of Windows time-wasters like Minesweeper or Solitaire. You'd be much better off checking out the Linux gaming sites hikari listed, you'll get a much better impression of what is really available for Linux gaming.


By the way, i didn't want to insult Nethack, i'm still playing it. But when i search for RPGs, i find ones like Nethack. That's what i'm upset at.
I hear that, nothing wrong with Nethack, but it would be nice if the selection of RPGs including something a little newer than ASCII graphics.

glennliwanag
December 30th, 2007, 02:46 PM
im a newbie ubuntu user, im encouraging my wife to used it also but the problem is she likes to play Bejeweled from Yahoo, when i tried it in firefox, it says that the game can only be played in Internet Explorer and windows.

she only opens our computer to play this game, so im still dual booting XP and Ubuntu

KhaaL
December 30th, 2007, 10:33 PM
im a newbie ubuntu user, im encouraging my wife to used it also but the problem is she likes to play Bejeweled from Yahoo, when i tried it in firefox, it says that the game can only be played in Internet Explorer and windows.

she only opens our computer to play this game, so im still dual booting XP and Ubuntu

This is very weird, do you know what those game require? (Java, flash...?)
I would help you, but I'm 600 km away from my linux computer (only 3 for more day... can't stand windows! :-#)

Yfrwlf
December 30th, 2007, 11:41 PM
im a newbie ubuntu user, im encouraging my wife to used it also but the problem is she likes to play Bejeweled from Yahoo, when i tried it in firefox, it says that the game can only be played in Internet Explorer and windows.

she only opens our computer to play this game, so im still dual booting XP and Ubuntu

May be a matter of spoofing your browser. You can tell Firefox to pretend it's IE to get past some of those dumb problems. If it uses Java or Flash it shouldn't be a problem to play it in Firefox. There are bejeweled games on Linux too tho you know. ;)

S3Indiana
January 2nd, 2008, 08:19 PM
im a newbie ubuntu user, im encouraging my wife to used it also but the problem is she likes to play Bejeweled from Yahoo, when i tried it in firefox, it says that the game can only be played in Internet Explorer and windows.

she only opens our computer to play this game, so im still dual booting XP and UbuntuExtensions like User Agent Switcher (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/59) and PrefBar (http://prefbar.mozdev.org/) resolve some of these issues...

Hightide
January 2nd, 2008, 10:14 PM
It seems to me that the philosphy behind ubuntu is incompatible with the profit based model adopted by the majority of the windows based game suppliers.

This is not a criticism but a recognition that alot of the gaming development for ubuntu users will come from the community developers out there once there is a significant user base.

regards

Yfrwlf
January 4th, 2008, 09:01 AM
It seems to me that the philosphy behind ubuntu is incompatible with the profit based model adopted by the majority of the windows based game suppliers.

This is not a criticism but a recognition that alot of the gaming development for ubuntu users will come from the community developers out there once there is a significant user base.

regards

Well, closed commercial development does exist for Linux, and Ubuntu, well, Canonical specifically embraces that kind of development too. Even if it's not the best, because of all the disadvantages of closed-source software, it's still development for Linux, which is always helpful. The more software for Linux period, the better we'll all be. If you don't want it, don't buy it. Open source is certainly better.

You'll see an increase in both closed and open source software as Linux use gets bigger. I just hope that open source development methods eventually dominate the closed source ones.

Famous Mortimer
January 4th, 2008, 10:50 AM
Some of the criticism appears to be slightly misplaced, even from my new guy’s eyes – it’s a bit like asking why your beautiful new car doesn’t go underwater, or why a glass of water doesn’t get you drunk.

It doesn’t make financial sense at the moment for games manufacturers to program for Linux. I’ve zero problem with paying money for games (as an Xbox 360 owner, I’d be a fool if I thought that), but the reason I took the plunge was not because I wanted Windows 2, but because I’d read about the Linux project, completely supported it and wanted to get involved. Get ready for music players that are “accidentally” broken to only play post-rock music 

Vamp898
January 4th, 2008, 09:03 PM
I Can play all my windows games i have with WinE, Cedega and the last solution VMware.

ashmew2
February 17th, 2008, 07:58 AM
I agree 100 % with the user who posted this Thread. If 3D Acceleration was working under Ubuntu , I guess there would be no stopping it.

Yfrwlf
February 17th, 2008, 12:57 PM
I agree 100 % with the user who posted this Thread. If 3D Acceleration was working under Ubuntu , I guess there would be no stopping it.

I guess you mean open source 3D accelerated drivers? There are some teams working on that. But of course you can always use your card manufacturer's drivers, but it's just not the most "free" solution. So it's sort of silly to say that 3D doesn't work in Ubuntu...since it does if you install the drivers.

It's mostly all a matter of Linux adoption. OpenGL 2 can do a lot of awesome effects just as good as Direct X, it's all a matter of companies caring about OpenGL and Linux, and they won't care until a bigger market is there. Until then games will just trickle in now and then. Too bad someone doesn't have deep enough pockets to help create a Linux gaming console. Have so many ideas about making one. >.<

frenchn00b
February 17th, 2008, 01:58 PM
I really mean what the title says. The fact that I can not play any game I want on Ubuntu is the only thing that prevents me from make the permanent switch on my desktop. My company owns VGPRO.com and we have a lot of contact with other gamers. Their opinions are all the same. "We'd switch to Ubuntu if only we could game!"

So, why aren't more resources being devoted to finding a free solution to the gaming problem on Ubuntu and every other linux distro?

There is nothing else to do with Ubuntu: Gaming and Desktop.

Servers will never work with Ubuntu. They make the choices for other distros. That's normal.

Hence Gaming and Desktop, introducing Linux to newbies, is the target of the distro.

Sockerdrickan
February 17th, 2008, 02:01 PM
The server edition of Ubuntu is just fine for what it's intended for.

xellas84
May 14th, 2008, 12:24 AM
I have no issues gaming on Ubuntu. I just finished playing Hl2: Episode 2 as it happens. Runs just as well as it did on my Windows setup and with out any issues I found.

Current games list:

Half-life 2 and Episodes 1 & 2 & Lost coast
Team Fortress 2
Portal
Garry's mod 10
Doom 3
Quake 4
Soldier of fortune
Homeworld 2 (wish i could find my home world 1 disc)
Stronghold
Darwinia
Defcon
Rail Road Tycoon 2
UFO: Alien invasion
Uplink
Unreal tournament (2003, 2004)

Hmm... Let's compare that to the list of games that run under Windows natively... Oh wait, that list would probably be several pages long.

Claiming that Linux plays games just like Windows is like saying a golf cart can drive just like a Ferrari. Sure, the basic architecture is the same, but the end result is VASTLY different. The OP's point isn't that Linux CAN'T play games, it's that it is NOWHERE EQUIVALENT to a Windows box. It's just NOT, even if you include WINE.

cogadh
May 14th, 2008, 03:26 AM
Hmm... Let's compare that to the list of games that run under Windows natively... Oh wait, that list would probably be several pages long.

Claiming that Linux plays games just like Windows is like saying a golf cart can drive just like a Ferrari. Sure, the basic architecture is the same, but the end result is VASTLY different. The OP's point isn't that Linux CAN'T play games, it's that it is NOWHERE EQUIVALENT to a Windows box. It's just NOT, even if you include WINE.
Sorry, but that is just flat out wrong. Linux is fully capable of gaming just as well, if not better than Windows, there just isn't the same selection of games available for it. Just look at games that are available for both platforms, like Doom 3. If you were to compare the performance of the game on identical systems, one running Linux and the other running Windows, you would find their performance to be nearly identical. In fact, when I ran the demo of Doom 3 on my dual boot system (a completely unscientific test, I'll admit) I actually got a higher FPS out of Linux.

Yfrwlf
May 14th, 2008, 03:38 AM
Sorry, but that is just flat out wrong. Linux is fully capable of gaming just as well, if not better than Windows, there just isn't the same selection of games available for it.

That's exactly what they said.


The OP's point isn't that Linux CAN'T play games, it's that it is NOWHERE EQUIVALENT to a Windows box.

I think you missed the "isn't". Yes, Linux can play games, yes probably better than XP from in my experience and most definitely better than Vista due to the bloated overhead. What they are saying is there aren't as many (especially good) games for Linux as there are for Windows. This is a fact. The more users who switch to Linux though, the more this will change, and the more games will be made for it, which in turn will allow more gamers over to Linux, etc etc.

There are still several issues that Linux faces, but one by one they continue to fall. Just make sure Linux doesn't turn proprietary, that's the main thing I ask for. Standards and compatibility, please. No, I will NOT install a new OS just because it comes with some games on it, you shouldn't need to do that. </rant>

xellas84
May 14th, 2008, 04:13 AM
That's exactly what they said.



I think you missed the "isn't". Yes, Linux can play games, yes probably better than XP from in my experience and most definitely better than Vista due to the bloated overhead. What they are saying is there aren't as many (especially good) games for Linux as there are for Windows. This is a fact. The more users who switch to Linux though, the more this will change, and the more games will be made for it, which in turn will allow more gamers over to Linux, etc etc.

There are still several issues that Linux faces, but one by one they continue to fall. Just make sure Linux doesn't turn proprietary, that's the main thing I ask for. Standards and compatibility, please. No, I will NOT install a new OS just because it comes with some games on it, you shouldn't need to do that. </rant>


Quoted for truth. We aren't saying "Linux can't play games as well". As an operating system, it is just as good, if not better than Windows (barring the issues with support of some graphics cards). However, saying it is JUST AS GOOD as Windows at gaming is currently WRONG, because in gaming SELECTION is just as important as how well the OS handles it. Let's face it, the fact that Linux's selection fits on one page pretty much rules it out as even equivalent to Windows in terms of gaming, much less better.