Battlefield Director: Linux Only Needs One 'Killer' Game To Explode 410
dryriver writes with an except from Polygon's interview with DICE creative directory Lars Gustavsson, who says it would only take one "killer" game for Linux to break into mainstream gaming (something some would argue it already has): "We strongly want to get into Linux for a reason," Gustavsson said. "It took Halo for the first Xbox to kick off and go crazy — usually, it takes one killer app or game and then people are more than willing [to adopt it] — it is not hard to get your hands on Linux, for example, it only takes one game that motivates you to go there." "I think, even then, customers are getting more and more convenient, so you really need to convince them how can they marry it into their daily lives and make an integral part of their lives," he explained, sharing that the studio has used Linux servers because it was a "superior operating system to do so." Valve's recently announced Steam OS and Steam Machines are healthy for the console market, Gustavsson said when asked for his opinion on Valve's recent announcements."
Overall right but unlikely to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
Overall, he is right. I bought gaming systems for a single game. For instance, I bought the Wii just to play FireEmblem. I was already interested but it is only on FE's release that I bought it. Once I had it, I played other things as well. But a single exclusive game I was interested in convinced me to buy.
I think that the same thing could happen for Linux. But I am no sure it will ever happen. Will there ever be a Linux exclusive game? If you were a game developper, would you commit to realse your fancy need AAA game ONLY on Linux and not on Windows? That seems like a stupid move unless the company receives a ridiculous amount of money cash for the exclusivity.
I don't think that compatibility with Linux will be sufficient to see an "explosion", it is an exclusivity one need. And being linux exclusive look a lot like betting on a three legged horse.
Clarification: (Score:5, Insightful)
It needs one killer game that you can't get elsewhere. Do you think Halo would have done what it did for the XBox if it was also available for the PS2?
And since I don't see many game companies jumping the Windows ship to start making AAA Linux exclusives, this guy's "insight" is irrelevant.
Just one game? (Score:2, Insightful)
Eh? Is there a precedent for that statement?
With each new game console that comes out, there needs to be a whole ecosystem to go along with it. Name me any game platform that took off because of one good game?
In a parallel example, what would you say to "Windows Phone would have taken off if it had one really good at in the app store." ?
Put another way, how good would a game have to be for an average user to want to reformat their hard drive?
Re:Clarification: (Score:3, Insightful)
Valve might do it. If they are to stand up for their Steam Machines idea, they should release Half Life 3 exclusively, at least for a reasonable amount of time.
Re:Just one game? (Score:4, Insightful)
I think Wii Sports qualifies. Certainly many bought a WII for that game alone
Re:Overall right but unlikely to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:YOLD! (Score:5, Insightful)
ignoring your FUD about Google and Valve, there are good reasons why it's important for Linux to be viable as a desktop environment. The main reason is that the other two main contenders seem to be moving towards a more 'controlled' sort of environment where they get a cut of all software sold and can allow or disallow whatever they want. Apple seems to be moving OSX towards the iOS model, with some iCloud features only available to software sold through their OSX app store. Microsoft, now that they are no longer being monitored closely for anti-competitive behaviour has had the way paved by iOS, and is implementing the same model with 'Metro'. You'll start to see the 'classic' interface an installation model lose support in future versions. That 30% cut looks pretty good to them.
Valve can see what's happening and wants to get ahead of the pack. They want to deploy on an open platform.
I want to be able to install any software I want without having to have it 'approved' by someone, and I'd like to have the option having my software and applications be open source so I can be more sure that various governments are not privy to my personal business. Of course, maybe that's just me. If you don't mind only having computing platforms that are basically walled-garden consoles, you need not worry. I'm sure they will also be available.
Re:Overall right but unlikely to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
That could work. But you need to give people incentive in release an exclusive version. Red Hat or Canonical could have the fund necessary to generate such an exclusive games. Or maybe one such effort could be crowdfunded. But nobody is going to develop a $10 million game and release it only on Linux without a significant incentive.
Re:YOLD! (Score:5, Insightful)
"They want to deploy on an open platform" should be "They want to deploy their own platform." Whether it will be "open" or not is very much in question.
Re:YOLD! (Score:5, Insightful)
Minor point: Valve doesn't want to deploy on an open platform, they just vehemently do *not* want to compete with Microsoft's "marketplace", or cede 30% to them. They want to control the store, just like Apple, Google and Microsoft.
You can buy a computer with Ubuntu preinstalled (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm typing this from a Ubuntu computer delivered to me just 2 days ago from http://system76.com [system76.com].
Is it fair to blame Ubuntu for all the issues that come with building a computer from scratch?
But with that said, I agree the current Linux distros aren't ready for the average computer user. It's not Linux that's the problem. It's the fact that distros just don't put in ( or have for that matter ) the resources necessary to "polish" the OS.
We know Linux can do this because we use Android phones, and they work just fine for most users.
And personally I believe until distros put philosophy aside and concentrate on bringing in enough resources to fund continued development, Linux will remain inadequate for the average home computer user.
Re:Clarification: (Score:5, Insightful)
What about the company with the most invested in this? Valve has made some AAA games over the years that most gamers have played, and if they announced Half-Life 3 as an exclusive for Steam OS, you can bet that Steam OS would suddenly see an uptick in users. Not to mention if they followed that up with Portal 3, Left 4 Dead 3, Team Fortress 3, etc. x3.
Hell, they could really confuse everyone by launching Dota 3 while they're at it.
Re:YOLD! (Score:2, Insightful)
But it's already started. There's no "classic" interface in Windows RT. Windows RT only supports apps from the Windows Store. If Metro actually was doing well (or hell they may try it anyway) then the desktop version will slowly follow suit.
Re:YOLD! (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not FUD if it's true, it's simply FACT. Do you dispute that this is what's happening? It's not like Microsoft is trying to hide what they're doing.
Re:Overall right but unlikely to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
Same site, bought some new hardware for a ...ahem... GNU/Linux Gaming Rig. Everything worked out of the box on Debian Testing. However, being that I develop software and occasionally make games, I'm not scared of this weird "Internet" documentation thing. So, I did a bit of research before buying my hardware that I was going to assemble...
I-- I'm sorry. I just don't understand WTF you're saying. Who assembles hardware and doesn't research whether it will meet their use case? That's not a "uber" geek thing, if you're building PCs from components, it's a no-brainer.
I've had more problems installing Windows7 on hardware that came with Windows 8 on it, due to moronic driver issues than on GNU/Linux -- In fact, I used a live CD to get on the web to get the Ethernet drivers, put them on the windows partition then reboot and get it working. Are you saying the MOBO being dead would have been any different on windows? Or, what? Because it seems installing OSs is your gripe, and if you actually do that a lot, you'll find that the it's FAR more accessible in many cases to install Ubuntu than Windows. My grandmother can do it: Boot the CD, click "Install" move a slider to allocate space for dual boot (if it's already got windows), and it's basically next, next, next, install... just like any other software on windows really. Granny CAN NOT make a dual boot with Windows...
So, yeah. Lots of Developers Love GNU/Linux, and it's just as difficult to install the Java runtime as it is to install Ubuntu. Most of the crap issues I've seen with games on Linux have with it is that they're wine wrappers or macromedia wrappers or some noob mistake where it wasn't compiled against the generic shared library. However, most of the time they seem to work for me -- I've got more Linux games installed than I have time to play thanks to HiB and other indie devs.
It only takes someone like me to say, "Meh, maybe I'll make the windows port work later if there's interest, but I made it on Linux, so that's what it runs on." and have a game be as popular. If folks will install JRE for Minecraft, they could dual boot Ubuntu. Hell, I've seen folks on Windows applying crazy patches and compiling drivers themselves to get some game to work -- Gamers will jump through some damn hoops, just look at DRM! So, I don't really think it's too far of a stretch outside the realm of possibility; It would be kind of rarer to say a few years ago, but have you seen the indie scene? It's exploding.
So, yeah, most folks developing on Linux start off with cross platform in mind, I know I do but that's because OSs should be irrelevant. For one of my from-scratch engines the Windows branch lags far behind the Linux branch and just because I'd rather add new features than port and debug some input or sound system issue in Windows. I mean, my 76 year old retired air-force mechanic neighbor who is nearly computer illiterate has been on Debian for 3 years now. Your "GNU/Linux is for nerds" FUD is just, well, moronic. If it were installed by default folks wouldn't have a hard time using it any more than Apple products or a Windows upgrade -- Less in fact if they were used to XP and you give them something other than Unity. If they're facing swapping out OSs (hint WinXP dies in 177 days) then GNU/Linux is actually probably an easier and better choice (since it can consume less resources than new flavors of Windows, also it's free).
Arch is a good attempt to save GNU/Linux, but it's too little, too late, IMO. I hope I'm wrong...
Interesting. So, what if you consider them all as GNU/Linux OSs instead of nit picking cons of each one? I mean, the "App Store" (software repository) model is pretty new to most Windows users who dealt with that cluster fsck of downloading crap from the web and a myriad of different installers and updaters... So, Hosting my game on my own site with a .deb and .rpm and .tar.gz isn't
Re:YOLD! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Overall right but unlikely to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:YOLD! (Score:5, Insightful)
The main reason is that the other two main contenders seem to be moving towards a more 'controlled' sort of environment where they get a cut of all software sold and can allow or disallow whatever they want.
How is that any different from Valve's business model?
That 30% cut looks pretty good to them.
You mean that Valve let games in the store just because they're a bunch of nice guys?
Valve can see what's happening and wants to get ahead of the pack.
Call me jaded but, as I see it, this is just Valve's pushing for more control and a bigger slice of the pie -- just like any other company. The fact that they say Linux (but mostly SteamOS, really) might make us feel all warm inside, but it doesn't change that.
Oh, and let's not forget for a moment that STEAM is, in fact, a subscription service. Try to not to accept the next change to their ToS and see how many of those games you'll be to play.
RT.
Is it really about the OS anymore? (Score:4, Insightful)
What it boils down to is simple, OS wars are dead. There's more than just Microsoft now. I personally prefer Windows 8 because it's faster than anything I've ever used before and it has less obvious bugs than the other platforms. Other people like Mac, others Linux, others Chrome (which is more of a Java platform than a Linux platform).
I think it's about time to consider that 99% of game development has moved into a new era of platform independent game engines. Using Unreal Engine, Unigine Game Engine, Unity3D and others you write the game once and tweak the controls for a dozen different platforms from phones to XBox/PS to Linux. Companies who code their own game engines and want to reinvent the wheel can do so if they want, but honestly, it's not so interesting. These days, if a game system developer really wants their platform to take off, they can make agreements with the platform system company and pay for the port or do it themselves.
Take a look at Microsoft. No one wanted to port to the Metro platform and Microsoft basically made it happen by working with the game engine companies. Now all the game vendors need to do is simply generate a new executable and tweak the controls.
If Valve wants support for SteamOS, the answer is simple, port the game engines. But I have no interest in games locked into a platform. I stopped buying consoles because I don't need a special machine for games anymore. Windows, Mac, Linux, iPhone, etc... are all powerful enough to play the best of them. Game consoles were only interesting when porting to a platform meant an endless amount of problems with hardware incompatibility. We don't do it anymore. These days, the game engines do the work for us. Content developers can produce awesome games without worrying about AMD vs. Pentium or nVidia vs. Intel vs. AMD. Hell, they don't even have to think much about Mac vs. Windows vs. Linux. They can develop games and simply deploy them.
SteamOS seems interesting, but I want one device for everything. I use a Surface Pro at the moment. Surface Pro 2 later this month. It's a laptop, a tablet, a video player, an ebook reader and a game system. Would I like better graphics? Yep... but Pro 2 has better graphics. And the graphics on the Surface Pro 2 are good enough that it's now more about game content than graphics quality. I carry an XBox controller in my backpack so I can play Sonic Racing or Lara Croft on airplanes.
It'll be pretty cool though if Valve makes it so I can buy a game and play it on SteamBox or my Surface without buying a second copy.
Re:Overall right but unlikely to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
No, I don't believe he does. The name "Linux" is overloaded and is used to refer both to the Linux Kernel and to the desktop operating system built around that kernel.
You well may feel that the GNU userland tools are more important than the Linux Kernel and that therefore the GNU project should have first billing. As such it is your right to prefix the OS name with "GNU/" if you feel that helps anything. But that doesn't make the more widespread usage wrong, and neither you nor Richard Stallman get to tell us what we call the OS.
This has been a public information announcement. Thank you for your attention.