Is the Key to Linux a Games-Based Distro? 860
An anonymous reader writes "If in the FOSS community we could only get our act together and launch a game-based distro, we will be home and dry. That, at least, is the view of one British games enthusiast, Ian Bonham, who says in the short Linux World article: 'I would be happy to help a group of volunteers create a distro based on games, because I believe that's where the next generation is - NOT in giving away copies of Linux or OOo. That's a short-term ideal. The PS2 and the X-Box(sic) run Linux, so let's create a distro that turns home PC into a console with development potential. Expand that distro to the consoles. And lets get some 'killer' games on that disk.'"
Re:Games Based Distro (Score:5, Interesting)
It's really true, there are some fundamental issues that need to be resolved before having a games-based distro. Right now, there wouldn't be that many games to play on it anyway.
absolutely not. (Score:2, Interesting)
Linux is about freedom of choice. Some people MAY want a Linux distribution that comes stocked w/games to play. Me? I don't. I don't play games on my computer. I use a PS2 for that... That's me though.
Feel free to start the project and get your supporters. Don't expect to dominate the Linux market w/it and PLEASE don't ATTEMPT to dominate it either.
Game Companies? (Score:3, Interesting)
Why game systems are successful (Score:4, Interesting)
A few ideas to throw out there... (Score:5, Interesting)
Ability to "lock" the scheduler, so that the game gets 100% CPU until it unlocks (effectively
making it a single process OS like DOS while in this mode).
While in the above mode, a user-configurable keypress to pause the whole system, no matter
what's going on.
Running the games in kernel space? Maybe this is just madness
if the CPU wasn't switching between contexts?
I'm sure I could think of more - yes I know this might not make the most stable system out
there, but for games use, wouldn't that be a good compromise?
Just perfect Wine/WineX (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the answer then lies within a solid emulator. I think gamining companies would support this as well. It would take them far less time and money to make sure their game was programmed to operate within Wine than to write a Linux port. Not to mention the pool of open source volunteers at their disposal.
Copy and paste (Score:3, Interesting)
Disclaimer: I use GNOME/Linux is my primary desktop, day in day out, there are things I love about it, but the average user experience stinks. Creating a frikkin games distro isn't going to help.
John.
This is probably the stupidest thing I have ever (Score:0, Interesting)
Linux games are in a sorry state, you simply can't get professional quality free content (textures, etc) in the same way as anyone can hack up some db server or whatever (which probably points to a fundemental difference between programming (being "easy" and art, demanding "talent").
Better yet - make it a multi-media console (Score:4, Interesting)
What would be really great is to port XBMC back to Linux, and meld it with MythTV for PVR functions. Supply the distro with preconfigured Emulators (just drop roms in a particular folder). I'm sure a distro like this would be something that many people would be interested it.
Here is my take on it : (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Interesting (Score:2, Interesting)
one of the biggest challenges is to get peoples legacy Windows games to work
Sure, but getting Mom & Pop to learn a new OS, no matter how nice a GUI it has, is painful and slow.
I have a bunch of *nixish machines in my house (4x MKLinux, 2x FreeBSD, 2x OpenBSD) and 1x Windows machine. Frankly I don't care if I can play games on my *nix machines, that's what my PC is for: gaming.
I don't buy the mantra that using a Windows machine for anything soils a person.
Live CD is where its at for games (Score:1, Interesting)
How about convincing EA to port games. (Score:3, Interesting)
Games drive the PC hardware industry now. Nobody needs a 3Ghz processor for business apps. For M$ Office or Open Office a 1.2Ghz to 1.6Ghz is more than enough. The only reason for super fast processors and video cards is to play high end games (graphics workstations are different, I mean the standard home PC).
Re:I'm sorry... (Score:3, Interesting)
Even the 640k barrier wasn't a big obstacle once 32 bit DOS Extenders matured. I remember when people were doubtful about Windows as a gaming platform, because DOS did it so much better at the time...
Requirements for console gaming (Score:1, Interesting)
2) NO front end - put a disk in and that has your front-end; no Linux programmer will ever understand this one
3) Lots of NATIVE games that run PERFECTLY
4) Someone who is willing to invest and risk hundreds of millions of dollars
I have a question: Why? Is there a reason to do this? I understand that there are people out there who love Linux (a little too much really) but is there a gap in the market that needs filling?
I have a Xbox and I really do not see how it could be improved from a GAMER's perspective. The gamer does not care about the political issues. They just want to be able to pick from a huge selection of games at the store and to be able to put the disk in without ANY configuration or fuss.
It seems that there are a lot of people out there who do not realize how much work it would be just to get the platform together. It would take millions in development.
A console such as I describe above will NEVER be created by the OSS community - there would be no interest in anything other than the technical aspects of it. To make a glossy and perfectly working system will take a Microsoft or Sony behind it.
If we ever do see Linux on a console as a corporate product (and I think that is likely); then it will bear little resemblance to Linux as we know it and will not really be important.
I mean, who cares what OS it is running? I just want it to be cheap and to work EVERY TIME.
Re:Interesting (Score:2, Interesting)
Cheap Engineer
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
We don't need a games based distro... (Score:2, Interesting)
Chris
Re:A few ideas to throw out there... (Score:3, Interesting)
They don't have it anymore. It provided, at most, maybe about 0.1% CPU boost, and if anything went wrong during that time *boom* the entire system melted down. I imagine, yes, they could have fixed that, but it would have been buggy code.
Are you seriously telling me that your Linux box runs at a load factor of more than 0.01 when it's not actually doing anything?
20:24:40 up 5 days, 8:58, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
I don't see the point of increasing complexity, or moving things into kernelspace, just for an extra 0% performance.
Re:It will take more than just any game, (Score:3, Interesting)
So why even have a closed source game on CD? No one will care about what OS the game is running.
Re:I'm sorry... (Score:3, Interesting)
And if you're calling Windows/DirectX a 'thin' layer, I think there are some misconceptions there.
Nor for Apple, either (Score:3, Interesting)
While many more games come out for the PC, there are are fair few that make it to the Mac: UT2004, Halo, Neverwinter Nights, Shadowbane, Everquest, Ghost Recon. And more. Yet Macs still have a 3% marketshare. It'll take more than just having games, or Macs would have been in a better position already. Mostly, it'll take not having Windows on your new computer already, but also an interface with a consistent metaphor that never requires the command line, etc.
Re:Interesting (Score:3, Interesting)
One Word (Score:3, Interesting)
Remember the short lived Apple console? That's what happens when a company without many resources tries to enter the game industry. Although this isn't a console approach, I doubt it would end in success. People won't flock over to Linux just to play games. Nobody ever buys a Mac for gaming.
Linux already has a market niche and is associated with being 'for nerds.' It's going to take a serious overhaul to try to do this, and its not even guaranteed to succeed.
Linux games myth... (Score:5, Interesting)
Linux isn't experiencing a high rate of adoption because its still too hard to use. We know this. No amount of games is going to fix that and [name your favorite distro here] are making slow but relentlessly steady headway (see Microsoft cringe).
My point is there is no single solution at this point. Linux needs Users Friendly standards from the layout to the message dialogs, application naming conventions, install/uninstall and system configuration. Thats a lot detail and involves a lot of seperate pieces. Standardising is also FUCKING BORING WORK. So don't expect it to happen as quickly as some other things.
Games are cool, but its not that simple.
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
For this reason, I consider a games distro to be one of the worst ideas to gain Linux converts. There are just too many games.
Concentrating on general (email, web browser, word processing, spreadsheet, etc.) and specific (CAD, web design: e.g. Dreamweaver) applications makes more sense. There the issues are more in terms of supporting a few apps that someone uses almost exclusively. File compatibility is the important part, not application compatibility (I don't need to run Microsoft Word if OpenOffice can load and save
I especially like CAD as a Linux app, because CAD designers frequently run *only* their CAD software on their PC. Even if they can't run any other software on it, it doesn't matter. They wouldn't anyway. Further, CAD uses gobs of resources and is thus better suited for lean running Linux (system processes leave more room for CAD processes).
IMO, games should be one of the last areas of focus for Linux developers. There are just too many legacy games which will never get ported. Thus promoting hacks like WINE. Linux should concentrate on its own apps, not pretending to be Microsoft Windows.
In the meantime, consider looking at multi-platform game development engines like those provided by Garage Games: http://www.garagegames.com/pg/browse.php?type=dev
Multi-platform engines enable game designers to get both markets easily. Ideally, they could develop on Linux (less system process bloat means faster compiling) and test the game on Microsoft Windows.
Btw, now that I have actually RTFA, I notice that the author is talking about something like bootable CDs with games on them. This already existed: that's exactly what Gentoo Games CDs were. The website ( www.gentoogames.com ) no longer seems to work, so I'm guessing that it never took off. Morphix also works on this (game specific live CD).
Another reason not to wait for games is the problem of too much of them being content rather than code. Modern games are frequently based on impressive 3D graphics (content) and movies (content) rather than spectacular game engines (code). Several of the big time multi-player games have already released Linux version (e.g. Id Software products). Until Linux has much more of a market share (at least 20%), we can't expect anyone to develop a Linux only game.
Look at how much money Microsoft is losing on XBox. Not a problem for them, since they have the money to lose. Linux doesn't have those kinds of resources. One game wouldn't do it. To really draw people would take ten or twenty.
Games On Bootable CD or DVD (Score:4, Interesting)
Why can't we build games where everything you need to run the game is right on the CD?
There are already Linux distros out there that boot into MAME. Why can't we create some type of standard that is the "whole package" answer to DirectX?
As long as your hardware is compatible, you just work. You boot from the CD and play that game and that game only. We can create a standard bootable game distro and port games inside that distro.
Once you have it running in a "fixed environment" of a bootable CD (you know every piece of code on the CD and its version, so you are in total control of compatibility and run environment), you can expand to get the same game to run in a general Linux environment.
Would it be a PITA to reboot my PC just to play a game? Yeah. Don't I already do something similar with console games? Yeah. Aren't I basically just turning my PC into a fixed environment like a console? Yes, but it is an environment where the developer has total control over the run environmnet.
Am I smoking crack here or does this make at least some sense?
Acbsolutely NOT what is required (Score:3, Interesting)
Remember "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."?
Soon to be replaced by "Nobody ever got fired for saving their company money." (by NOT paying the IBM premium?)
As Windows gets gamier and gamier (, I love the British expression,) it is perceived as less and less of a serious OS. Face it, its broken adn it can't be fixed. Its not a "serious" OS.
IBM's OS died from trying to compete by tying hardware in with the software when they'd given the store away to the clones.
Mac OS was never in the running (except that X-Serve running OS X has a shot.)
Windows is losing mind and marker share. WHY?
Linux is now in the running to win the marbles.
Don't blow it by running games.
Linux is poised to conquer the office PRECICELY because its NOT a game platform and its cheaper than having a bunch of MSCE flubbing things.
Gentoo's ut2003 and America's Army (Score:3, Interesting)
I think in order for this to work, we need the following steps:
1. Release Linux like a Game CD you'd put in a Playstation or XBox. I often have to reboot to play a lot of games on my PC anyway, because of Window's poor memory management. Things still work better after a reboot, even in XP.
2. Have it save game files to floppy/USB flash card, or a partition on the hard drive. That way, the Gamer can carry the CD with him, or use a friends, but the game saves will be stored in his USB or floppy, just like a memory stick in a Gabecube, for instance.
3. On boot, just like Knoppix, configure the setup, then goes right to the GUI.
4. The GUI has a menu, maybe like:
a. Play game
b. Run GAIM/XMMS
c. Tweak settings
d. Redetect USB/Floppy saves
e. Advanced configuration
f. Really advanced (aka Linux with some GUI)
g. l33t 4dv4nd0rz (aka XTerm)
x. Shut down, eject CD, reboot
See, things like "f" and "g" will introduce kids to Linux like the command cheat codes and easter eggs in games now.
5. We're Open Source. All we need is for people to start thinking like gamers who can program, and we can turn stuff from Egoboo and bzflag (some of the native choices) into some really sweet FPS. Stop trying to copy what's popular, innovate!
6. Since Open Source is not a great marketing engine (at least yet), we'll have to go by word of mouth. The best way to do that is to make something so unique, that big name companies who worry about stuff like parental ratings and market share couldn't compete. Maybe have a FPS with incredible gore and violence, and maybe nudity. A very addicitve strategy or simulation game, like Civilization, Sim City, or something... but something that hasn't been done before, like My First Brothel.
Even better, start a secret campaign banning the game. Get it blacklisted by a church group. That will put it into the limelight real quick. Well, okay... maybe that's too far. The Republicans might denounce Linux as "spreading immorality to the youth." Forget I said that.
But you have to think like a marketing person. You have to:
1. Create need
2. Fulfill need
3. Sustain need
And I agree, games for Linux would really drive it. I mean, come on, who needs an ATI Radeon 9200 for MSOffice? Games have DRIVEN industries, and Linux should not be counted out.
But, and here's the clincher: is the Linux community ready to be popular? Remember when AOL let users onto Usenet? Think hard about this path.
This is the wrong approach (Score:2, Interesting)
So what needs to be done if you want to win the gamer crowd over is to indicate Linux does something that Windows simply cannot do. I know, there's the infinite flexibility and infinite stability factors, but last I checked, a gamer isn't *really* concerned with that - the gaming box is a gaming box (oppose workstation and server), so you don't need to be up all the time, barring the occasional system explosion that they seem to not mind putting up with. (Note, this is perspective.)
he's stupid, but right. (Score:1, Interesting)
For Linux to break MS's stranglehold on the consumer desktop market, the best thing it can do to compete is to offer backwards compatibility with a plurality of Windows games, as well as several Linux-only games.
Market realities have worked against Linux games in the past, and continue to be the biggest obstacle to Linux's success in the home desktop segment. It costs anywhere from 3 to 10 million dollars to make a "good" game. The destination platform for a game is largely decided by the publisher, and that decision is largely based on existing market penetration. Even now, fewer PC games are made, as publishers migrate their products to console.
There is some good news, however. With commonplace multi-platform releases, and Sony's PS2 dev software designed for use within Linux, it makes sense for a developer to write a Linux port, use it for internal testing, and possibly release an unsupported version for Linux gamers. This way, titles for PS2 (or PS3) could see Linux ports in a similar way that titles for Xbox see Windows ports. Unfortunately, for this to be adopted by developers 2 things have to happen. First they need a comprenehsive IDE, toolset, and game API (at least a DirectX-equivalent, but better yet middleware) written by Linux developers and/or Sony, that eases both development of PS2 games and their Linux ports. Secondly, publishers need some sort of incentive to allow the Linux ports to be released to the public. This is especially difficult, given widespread publisher fears of piracy and the current low market penetration of Linux. In fact, the only power that can convince publishers to release for Linux would be Sony, which would have many of the same reservations as the publishers (it is, itself, a 1st party publisher!). Still, Sony has many reasons to push Linux. It would pose little or no threat to the Playstation's current market dominance. If successfully adopted as a consumer platform, Linux would ultimately weaken Microsoft AND the Xbox. One of the most common developer complaints against Sony, programmability and support, would be forgotten. And through its provision of open-source middleware and perhaps closed-source game development tools for that middleware, Sony could license its own development solutions to independent developers for Linux, bypassing the 3rd party publisher middlemen, gaining another source of revenue, and controlling a newly popular PC platform for gaming (essentially providing a game QA/certification position comparable to what Microsoft provides for Windows games). By pushing Linux game development, Sony could kill several birds with one stone.
Re:Why I don't run Linux (Score:2, Interesting)
I do not care how customizable Linux is. I don't care what distros are out there. I want to use Linux to get work done.
Same reason I started with Linux -- it was more practical. At some point I swayed into the whole Free Software mindset and actually put up with some workarounds just because I felt it was the right thing to do. No longer. I'm back to using Linux because it's just easier.
I've been thinking of getting Shake, the high end compositing package. It's no longer available for NT. It's only OSX, Irix, and Linux now.
It may have an XP version at some point...
I downloaded Mandrake, because I heard it was easiest to use. I partitioned in advance, burned it, and installed it. It went off without a hitch.
Installation is a strongpoint of Mandrake's.
When I tried to setup my wireless network card, it wasn't automatically recognized and installed. I couldn't find documentation on how to get it recognized and installed. No links to device drivers. Nothing.
Nor was the wireless card in my Thinkpad recognized by Win2K. I had to do lots of Googling and hunting around on the IBM site to find drivers. The modem was recognized without a problem in 2K. Under Linux (RH9, specifically) the wireless 'just worked'. The modem required a download of the Lucent rpm and a rebuild. Then it worked. The ease of installation was a little better for Linux in this case.
At this point, I wanted to quit. For some reason, I didn't.
I felt the same way about Win2K. It was a PITA to locate all the drivers (video, sound, power management, DVD playing, etc..
I used a different card, that was automatically recognized. When I went to setup the ESSID, WEP key, etc, I was presented with lots of options in the network setup. I didn't know what they meant, nor did I suspect they were important.
That's odd. The network setup for the Linux partition was pretty much the same as the Windows version.
In the end, just as the past 3 times (usually every two years) I've installed Linux, I've been annoyed and bogged down with learning useless information that "Just Works" in other operating systems.
And again I felt the same way about Win2K. For example, try getting DivX to play properly under 2K. It required downloading of the DivX program and a fee. The CD Writer required extra software (and a fee). There was no word processor. There was no remote desktop software. There was no graphics software ( I don't count Paint as a graphics program). Updates required a minimum of four reboots for various service packs and "must reboot to complete" packages. Hell, even the digital camera wasn't working properly. Under Linux it was a simple matter of "yum -y update; reboot; yum install OpenOffice". Everything else was installed by default.
Linux does not need a games distro. It needs to be easy to use. I don't care how close it is. If I have to use google to find a device driver, it's too much work. If I have to edit a text file, it's too much work. If I have to manually compile programs, it's too much work. I'm lazy, because there's no reason I shouldn't be.
And this was just for the laptop. Have you ever tried configuring Windows for commodity hardware (i.e., not bought from a big name manufacturer?). It's near impossible to find drivers that work properly. Under Linux most stuff "just works". Edit text files? Ever try to clean up spyware and adware from a Windows machine before Adaware existed? You're talking serious registry hacking there. Let's not forget all the little tweaks to the TCP/IP stack under Windows that requires, that's right, more registry hacking. Under Linux these are text files in plain English. Now I'm not saying that you need to mess with the registry for everything under Windows, but it's unfair to claim that it's easier than having to edit a text file.
The key to Linux's mainstream success is offering the same services of other operating systems rather than offering services only a few people give a damn about.
Linux is a lot bigger than some may realize. It's getting mainstream.
What Linux needs is an installed BASE, first... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Woo (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Multiple monitor support? Has been there. (Score:3, Interesting)
Morphix has done it already, again (Score:3, Interesting)
Get the ISO [sourceforge.net]
The morphix site [morphix.org]
Why limit ourselves to just GNU/linux? (Score:5, Interesting)
This would be a win for Apple and the community as then game developers could target one platform that would encompass Mac, Linux, BSD etc. Perhaps the combination of all these platforms together would be a big enough number to start convincing game companies to pursue the *nix market.
The key here would be convincing Apple to throw in the marketing. Without marketing, it would probably never take off. And come to think of it, maybe it would be impossible to convince Apple since they really arent trying to sell gaming machines. idunno, just a thought that seems to make a lot of sense in a lot of ways.
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
A standardized Linux distro is needed. Not another obscure niched one except built just for games. Because a standardized distro would be inherrently best for games.
Imagine if Bruce Perens' UserLinux came with nvidia and ati's binary drivers and automatically installed them during the distro installation. Currently no distro that I know of does this, the drivers must be manually installed.
One could argue that in most cases you have to do the same thing in Windows, but in Windows all that requires is double clicking an install file. In Linux you have to usually exit X, check dependencies, and all kinds of other cryptic stuff.
Finally, the one thing that we most need that a standardized distro can provide, is a standardized directory layout. None of this
As a software author, most authors only release their software as source when dealing with Linux, because it's the only way to ensure that it will work in every distro. But if there was a standardized directory layout and package management system, every dependency could always be found in the same spot and there'd be no need for third party package management and binary compilation.
This may seem like nitpicking, but many companies don't port their games to Linux on the sole basis that they 1. don't want to release source and 2. don't want to take the time to write an installer which can accomodate every distro's different package management, directory layout, and dependency tree.
So that, my friends, is what Linux needs. Create that and gaming will follow.
Why I dont run Windows (Score:2, Interesting)
Your problem is that you don't want to learn..."I've been annoyed and bogged down with learning useless information that "Just Works" in other operating systems"...BAH!!!
To each their own...Linux is a hell of a lot easier to use for me, and I've been using Windows 5 times as long. How we get Linux mainstream is have it preinstalled on cheap computers targeted towards new computer users. People are too stubborn and stuck in their ways to change for the most part.
The sad truth is.... (Score:1, Interesting)
We already have all sorts of high level and low level librarys for game programming. For example, OpenGL,SDL and PyGame cover the graphics side of it. So what we don't have a equivalent of an all in one set of librarys like DirectX, thats not the real problem.
We even have 3d engines such as crystal space.
What are we missing? The artists. More specific, high quality open source art - 3D models and animation, textures, sprites.
If we can get some good artists on the GPL bandwangon we can be on our way.
Dual boot NTFS (Score:2, Interesting)
However what's holding me and I think many people back is the uncertainty here. For instance, if I were to repartition my drive from the installer would it resize an NTFS partition without blowing data away? As far as I know it would not, correct?
That being the case, what is the simplest (lowest risk) way of creating a dual boot setup on a laptop?
Re:Interesting (Score:2, Interesting)
I think the chicken comes first. Keep moving towards the goal of a super-slick, highly productive desktop. Once that goal is achieved, the games will come.
There was not many Windows games (only DOS games) until after everyone was using Windows for productivity apps.
linux and games (Score:2, Interesting)
Go Java Go! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What planet is this guy from? (Score:1, Interesting)
Thanks a bunch, fucktard. Programmers aren't important for a software product. Yeah.. right. You're probably part of the reason why third-person action adventure titles are becoming so numerous as technological innovation in gameplay has taken a back seat to the number of polygons in a model.
I don't belittle the efforts of content creators, but with the seven commercial game projects I've worked on, programmers have been just as important and have worked just as hard as any other member of the team. Typically several months before a game project really begins, programmers will have a technology testbed running on the target platforms to attempt to evaluate the system, prototype the gameplay while working with the designers and figure out the scale of the assets - how much they're going to let the artists build. Then (depending on the game type), they build the tools that the artists can use to build their content.
When the game enters production, they'll be tweaking the tools and coding gameplay-specific features. If the game is scheduled and correctly, the hours should be just as long, just as hard - no matter what role in development you play.
Even when the content is done, programmers will still be tweaking, optimizing, fixing last-minute bugs that are preventing the game from being released. Programmers typically end up being the interface between QA and the content creators, being the ones that really know what's going on in the game. Programmers get builds out to QA - then they get back reports of problems and have to figure out what caused something to break - then even if a last-minute content fix is needed (it's not broken code), they end up having to do that themselves.
And when it's 3am on a Monday morning, trying to get a playable build to the publisher by 10am - you're going to find programmers and QA still in the building.
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
I get identical performance, including framerates, in linux and windows with both ut2003 and the ut2004 demo.
I also play Alpha Centauri, Neverwinter Nights, Enemy Territory, Kohan, and Civilization: Call to Power very satisfactorily in linux, thanks largely to tuxgames.com.
The only reason I still have a dual-boot is Rise of Nations. There are more games available for linux than people realize. Everything id publishes, and epic game's stuff, and an eclectic assortment of others.
Re:Woo (Score:5, Interesting)
Neverwinter Nights and expansions
Quake 1,2,3 and mods
Return to Castle Wolfenstein
Unreal, Unreal Tournament, Unreal 2k3/2k4demo and mods
Warcraft III and expansion
Diablo I and II and expansion
Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast
Angband
Descent III
Half life and mods
Games that I've been really annoyed that I couldn't play on my linux box in the last few months:
Unreal II
Various midi-enabled piano-tutor games
Linux gaming is not where it was a few years ago. You might need a winex rpm to get past the copy controls for some of the games but it's cheaper and better than buying windows (or any proprietary console or whatever).
Re:Interesting (Score:1, Interesting)
So I go out and buy game X which is built on Knoppix and sold as a bootable cd. So what happens when it doesn't support my video card? my sound card? Wouldn't that make it just like the "old" days when a DOS game programmer had to program for every possible sound and video card?
Also, where are you going to put saved games? Remember, we can't mess with Mommy's and Daddy's documents. There's no way I'm going to buy a game if I can't even save it. Ok, let's assume for a moment it simply mounts up a partition and saves it there.
That would bring us to another problem. Say I throw this game in my machine a few years from now and it's (my computer) running the ext5 file system (hypothetical situation), I won't be able to save my game, or worse, it tries to treat my ext5 partition as an ext3 partition, and trashes it. Oops. Actually, while I wrote that I thought up somewhat of a solution, use floppy disks like memory cards... but then most newer computers (that I've seen at least) don't come with floppy drives.
I could ramble on for another hour, but I think I'll stop now... before I make more of a fool of myself.
ASP
Re:Interesting (Score:3, Interesting)
AMEN to that brother!!
I recently downloaded a trial version of a development system for windows. Size: 68Meg. Yes, 68Meg. Now you can go on about bloat and download and the advantages of libraries blah blah blah, but on Linux, this is what I want.
Download->Install->Run
Is that really so hard??
Re:Games Based Distro (Score:1, Interesting)
Linux as it is, simply doesn't qualify as a "desktop OS". It may even be a stretch to call it a "system" at all. Sure the kernel is a system, but what about the rest of it? By itself a kernel is useless. Linux (considered as the whole OS) is not something that you can just hand to a non-technical enduser and say "Enjoy!"
Things that are trivial on Windows and Mac are for-gurus only on Linux and somethings just don't work at all no matter how smart you are or how much money you want to throw at the problem.
If Linux is to ever get out of this chaotic mess it's in and become a real desktop, players like IBM and HP have to get together and enforce some standards. That will mean bypassing the distros, which are all intent on becoming a defacto standard individually by themselves. Because of the distro infighting and the rapid one-upsmanship of Kde and Gnome, the Linux desktop remains an instable platform which companies that make applications software that people PAY MONEY to use, find a forbidding and hostile environment.
You can't have a sucessful Linux desktop without bringing the makers of desktop software in on the party. If they can't expect to recoup their porting investment before their app is broken by the swift and circular progress of Linux desktop environments and underlying libraries, then THEY'LL NEVER COME TO LINUX AT ALL.
It SUCKS mostly because it doesn't have to be this way, yet without some tough decisions, cooperation and leadership, from those in a position to lead, we'll still be here 5 years from now WONDERING WHY THE FUCK DESKTOP LINUX ISN'T TAKING OFF.
Re:Interesting (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Interesting (Score:3, Interesting)
I believe it... (Score:2, Interesting)
I think that if you could goto your local computer store and their software section has as large of linux selection as windows then it will help mega tons.
Yeah yeah I understand you can just download most of linux software for free however most people don't know this due to the M$ brainwashing effect.
If there was a nice GUI for Gentoo that would an image of each package when searching/listing it would help new people.
Re:Woo (Score:3, Interesting)
Stop thinking of the framework as middleware and start thinking of it as the platform, the application, and the whole game - code, script, and all, is the user-made content.
Linux needs a free one of those.