Are Commercial Games Finally Going To Make It To Linux? 242
colinneagle writes "Those of us who actively promote Linux as a viable desktop alternative to Windows are often greeted with the following refrain: 'Nobody will use Linux because there are no good games.' The prevailing wisdom is that the abundance of high-quality, commercial video gaming is a key factor in the market-share dominance that Microsoft Windows enjoys. And, in all reality, this is somewhat true. So, then, the obvious course of action is to convince the video game publishers and developers of the world that Linux is a viable (if, perhaps, a bit niche) market. And by 'viable' I mean one thing and one thing only – 'profitable.'Luckily, there have been three high-profile recent examples of Linux users going absolutely nuts over video games, forking over their hard-earned cash in the process: the Humble Indie Bundle (drawing in huge numbers of sales — for a DRM-free product, no less — with sales numbers by Linux users consistently beating out sales to MacOS X users); Canonical's Ubuntu Software Center (where video games make up the top 10 paid software packages); Valve's announcement that it is bringing the Steam store, and community portal, to Linux desktop (specifically Ubuntu). Will the indie game developers (along with Valve) reap the bulk of the rewards that releasing games on Linux is offering...or will some of the big publishers realize what they're missing out on and join in the fun?"
Sure! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is that if this does gain momentum, it will be for a limited set of distros such as Ubuntu, to ease the issues of installation problems, drivers, what have you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maplin UK recently had a While-Stocks-Last promotion on Intenso 64GB pen drives - three for £18. That promo lasted all of half an hour before even the distribution centres ran out.
Pissed me off, I was ready to buy nine.
Re: (Score:2)
Holy crap, and I thought getting 4x 4GB or 2x 8GB for 20€ two years ago was a good deal.
Re: (Score:2)
last good deal I had on portable memory was PNY Olympic Edition 8GB Class 6 SD cards, 2 for £12 (this was June this year). That was a PC World thing. Before that, it was an Integral Class 4 32GB SD card at £24 (when everyone else was selling them at £40+ - Feb/March this year).
Re: (Score:2)
As to linux games, I have always been one of those wanting to move
Re: (Score:2)
Maplin UK recently had a While-Stocks-Last promotion on Intenso 64GB pen drives - three for £18. That promo lasted all of half an hour before even the distribution centres ran out.
I'm pretty sure that was one of those attention-grabbing below-cost-price offers on an intentionally-limited amount of stock that one has to be fast and lucky to catch. As such, it doesn't say much about the everyday price of a 64GB pen drive.
That said, one can probably pick up a 16GB drive for more like US $10 these days.
Re: (Score:2)
and Newegg has the 32GB type for less then $20 on a regular basis. I'm planning on getting either them or a 64GB after the Xmas season depending on what's cheaper
Re:Wrong question (Score:5, Informative)
HP is very well covered on Linux. As is Oki and Brother.
Disclaimer: I use all three, on SuSE 9.2 Pro.
Or are you talking about toy printers (Lexmark, Canon) with ink that costs more than premium champagne?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wrong question (Score:5, Insightful)
I looked around for Linux printers, but realized nothing out there fit the small space that my currently uncooperative Lexmark takes up. I was facing the same rarity issue as those seeking 14 inch 4:3 LCDs. Single function color inkjets are going extinct, and my space fits were a dubious Canon Mobile an HP 100 Mobile I had vaguely seen online at some point. one. Paid $300 for the HP and my old jam-loving Linux-hating clunker will get canned when it runs out of ink.
I still do not understand why HP keeps Linux support hidden from us savvy shoppers, despite supporting MacOS X and including a whole addendum sheet about some post-print MacOS 10.7 gotcha inside the box. I was forced to use my smartphone to google the Linux support bit at the store before approving my purchase --salesperson had no clue because their stickers and even site has no clue, of course. Confirmation came straight out of the HP site in a google search, even. What gives? That's just like the nice surprise of IPv6 support in my 2009 high-end home router... maybe they don't want to cut into their own business-tier profits? But HP OfficeJets are supposedly already in the business tier.
Gnome 3 and Unity had turned me off, so I froze Ubuntu at 2010 versions until the laptop died this year. I thought I'd just keep linux in VM's forever in the new one, so my newfound Linux support allows me to give Linux another chance as a main OS in a dual-boot setup.
Pro-tip: Skip HP's urge to install their printer utilities by skipping autorun and manually using the Windows Add Printer wizard. I think the utils make sense only if you want new-fangled e-mail printing, or if you need control of scanner and fax features after buying some 20"x10" desk hog whose special features are best left for your office. My Oracle VM had no trouble letting Mint find and use the printer with no fuss.
Re:Wrong question (Score:4, Insightful)
I still do not understand why HP keeps Linux support hidden from us savvy shoppers
I could not agree more, it's almost if the company is embarrassed by this and I used to work for HP at one stage, however I never had any issues with printing from a Linux machine via CUPS and that includes low and high end printers, colour and black and white, so I always recommend HP printers although I would think that most brands would work as well.
Normally when adding a new printer to CUPS under Linux I let the software download the correct drivers and from personal experience all the important printing features just work. I have found that HP printers have a very good web interface that allow you scan or fax (if supported by the printer) and since Linux has support for many web browsers the controlling and extracting info from or even too a printer is intuitive and simple to do.
Re: (Score:3)
Let us rephrase it:
"Are the printer manufacturers ever going to release their 100+ megabyte install packages, which they have for Windows, on Linux?"
Printers might work just fine in Linux with CUPS, but given how big some driver-packages are on Windows, clearly something is missing on the Linux side! :)
Re: (Score:3)
Any savvy person knows to get a networked printer, which also happens to make most driver issues irrelevant, as it will use a relatively standard networking printing protocol.
Re: (Score:3)
I point you to my post from 2007 [gamerslastwill.com]
We'll see if it rings true.
Re:Sure! (Score:4, Interesting)
here's the text for lazy people.
Re: (Score:3)
That would be annoying as hell. On top of that, it'd force the development studios to support everything beneath the game as well as on top. Rather than diminishing the support costs, you've just exploded them.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course! This makes perfect sense, especially when many new computers are shipping without optical drives!
Re: (Score:2)
Of course! This makes perfect sense, especially when many new computers are shipping without optical drives!
You know that you can boot into an OS from a USB key and install or run appropriate software. I have not used CD's, DVD's or BD's for that matter to install software for over 4 years now. Of course if you have a locked down device that has no input peripherals then you are definitely at the mercy of the vendor.
Re: (Score:3)
That's actually a great idea. There's one big problem, though: hardware support. Your custom distro would only support hardware up until that point in time, which meant you'd have to look for legacy hardware two years from now. But what if you offered the hardware, too, in a bundle? That way you'd have control over both hardware and software - there's nothing easier to support of develop for. And, to reduce costs, you could share a platform like that across many games, so... oh, wait...
Re: (Score:3)
It's actually a really stupid idea. Why the fuck would I, as a consumer, want to have to reboot to play a game, screw around keeping track of all discs or USB drives or whatever, and lose the ability to do anything else with my computer when it's playing a game?
On top of that, yes, as you say, hardware support would be problematic. Updates would be a pain in the ass. There would be absolutely no way of knowing if any two games would do something incredibly weird to your system because maybe neither one of t
I highly doubt it (Score:5, Insightful)
I see a few big problems:
1) Hardware/drivers which you touch on, but is bigger than you think. I am going to be all kinds of pissed off when I buy a new graphics card and instead of just working with all my games, but faster, as it does now, it works with nothing because none of them have drivers. I then have to wait for each and every game to update, which many, particularly old ones, won't do. This is a really major issue, PC gamers are not going to accept the concept of having to stick with the same hardware forever to play games, and having to give up games when they do change.
2) Multi-tasking. Part of the reason to own a PC is to be able to do more than one thing at once. This includes in games. With my PC I can chat on Teamspeak, listen to MP3s, and play a game all at the same time. With a live DVD I couldn't do that, unless all the programs I happened to want were included.
3) Game size. Many games are pushing past one DVD in size now. If you are doing a live system, there are interesting challenges to trying to have swappable DVDs.
4) Access time. A big advantage of PC gaming is having low load times. Things stream fast of a HDD, and lightning fast of an SSD. DVDs crawl by comparison. People are not going to want that.
5) Launch time. Right now, if I want to play a game on my system, I just run it. I can be in game in seconds. No big commitment, I don't even have to close whatever I was doing, just come back to it after. With a live DVD I have to shut down everything, reboot my system, and a slow reboot at that since it is off DVD, just to play the game.
6) Now the biggie: The rise of digital distribution. Gamers and game companies are all about the concept of direct downloads. That really doesn't work with live DVDs. Nobody is interested in downloading an ISO, burning it to DVD, and rebooting their system. They are interested in downloading and playing. Heck companies are working (with some success in the MMO market at least) on letting you stream in assets so you can play before the download completes. It is all about less cost for the companies, more convenience for the consumer.
The window for this idea is long past.
Valve thinks so. (Score:5, Informative)
Seems like the case.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/16/valve-makes-steam-for-linux-official/ [engadget.com]
http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/09/13/steam-linux-client-release-looks-imminent-games-and-beta-spotted/ [pcgamer.com]
http://tech2.in.com/news/pc/steam-greenlight-lists-games-for-linux/435732 [in.com]
Re: (Score:3)
I am can't wait to see what happens. The Linux users I know won't give money for software unless it is some indie semi-open source "please donate your money" developer like the case with Humble Indie Bundle. I wanna see how big titles like Call of Duty do. I predict disaster.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Valve thinks so. (Score:4, Interesting)
I think if we're honest, Valve's big complaint about Windows 8 has nothing to do with "performance" or expected sales, it's more about "waah we were about to launch an application store but now thanks to Microsoft's we won't have a virtual monopoly on that for Windows."
Re:Valve thinks so. (Score:5, Insightful)
And they're porting to linux as a hedge against a massive failure of windows 8 and an abandoning of the Microsoft platform.
For the vast vast vast vast majority of developers the added overhead of a mac version, let alone a linux version isn't worth the investment at this time. Activision is even cutting out windows XP support (and that still has `12% of the PC game marketshare: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey for august). If you look at overall operating system marketshare, windows has about 91% of the overall market, Mac around 7, Linux 1, and then you're into the margin of error on reporting. Linux just isn't a market worth investing in unless you can count on a few tens of thousands of copies or you're looking at it as an investment in a future platform.
What this tells us is likely that valve is looking at doing a linux console (sort of like the PS3), but based around steam, as a potential future product, especially if windows 8 is as much of a disaster as it seems to be *and* windows marketshare starts to tank. I could also (or instead) see them using a steam cloud of linux servers streaming content, rather than selling you a box too, it is still easier to run a huge linux server farm than windows server farm (especially given the licensing issues with doing that with windows). That doesn't mean anyone else wants in on this plan particularly, but for Valve, who are trying to keep themselves relevant in a world of windows App stores and consoles that have their own clouds they need to be trying all sorts of stuff to keep people using Steam. They can make money on a half life 3, portal 3 etc, but keeping Steam afloat in a Windows 8/9 world presents some serious challenges.
Like Mac, the linux numbers are going to under-report 'gamer' types, because people who play games switch to windows right now, even if they would rather game on Linux. But it's still a very very small market to try and serve, especially when games usually work under Wine so why do any work for 'native' linux when you don't have to? The Eve guys gave up because they couldn't match Wine performance after all, and while WoW runs on Linux they also have an infinite pile of money to throw at the problem, and something like steam, they want to be everywhere in case the PC business completely transforms overnight.
Re: (Score:3)
No; they're doing it so they have an OS for their upcoming set-top box product.
The fact that, due to the OS chosen being Linux, it just happens to run on PCs to? Just a side-effect. Whether they continue to support Linux-on-PCs after the set-top-box succeeds or fails is really the best indicator, but we won't know that for years.
Re: (Score:2)
I would consider 'set top box' and 'console' the same thing for this discussion.
The proper set top boxes from the cable companies is a whole other problem. In that they'd be going head to head with the DVR and PVR market. But going head to head with cisco on that is a really really poor plan. Cisco just spent what, 5 billion dollars on NDS to get control of basically the whole set top box market, Valve is big, but it has no relationships with the cable companies, and I can't see them particularly wantin
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I didn't read your post carefully enough before replying, sorry.
But I do honestly believe Valve has zero interest in Linux-as-a-PC-OS, they only care about Linux-as-a-console-OS. That you get the first is a side-effect of them developing the second.
Re: (Score:2)
I diverged from my own one line summary, that didn't help readability or convey my point particularly well.
Re:Valve thinks so. (Score:5, Interesting)
No, they're porting to Linux as a hedge against the success of Windows 8. Valve has an app store they get a huge fraction of their income from. Since Windows 8 will have its own Windows Marketplace app store, Microsoft is unlikely to be friendly to Valve's store. In fact, Independent Software Vendors with valuable markets in Windows that Microsoft decides to want tend to start having issues running in Windows at all. Microsoft has decided they want Gaben's Steam marketing revenues - and probably the games money too now, and Gaben knows that once they decide that the party is over in Windows - they cannot be dissuaded, negotiated with, or convinced. He knows this because he used to work there.
So Valve needs a new platform for their game engines, games and game store to run on because Windows 8 is not going to work. Since Apple has the same app store issues and Linux doesn't, Linux it is.
Re: (Score:2)
No, they're porting to Linux as a hedge against the success of Windows 8.
I sort of covered that in my 3rd paragraph. It's not windows 8 they're worried about, that's almost certainly doomed at this point. Windows 9 on the other hand....
But even then, they need to look at what value they can add as a store, and what they do if the whole Windows ecosystem implodes upon itself from microsoft doing things badly.
Ultimately this is a problem all of the big software vendors need to think about. Microsoft going after their market could be a disaster (think office to IBM lotus notes o
Re: (Score:2)
Windows 9 on the other hand....
All future versions of Windows are now closed to Valve. Even future Windows Updates will break Valve's game engine for no good reason. Valve isn't going to have solid documentation for the next version of DirectX, let alone the next version of Windows. They'll be lucky if their customers can still play their games past next Patch Tuesday. Microsoft has decided that it's time to harvest Valve's customers and profits. I can now safely say that Valve isn't going to get the early access to Windows 9 they w
Re:Valve thinks so. (Score:4, Interesting)
Even future Windows Updates will break Valve's game engine for no good reason.
That doesn't even make sense. Much as I have been trying to persuade them, microsoft is not interested in making or selling game engines. There's a big difference between the directx API and a game engine, and MS isn't in the latter business at all, despite the fairly compelling case for there to be some serious software companies selling game engines at tiered pricepoints with tiered support.
I can now safely say that Valve isn't going to get the early access to Windows 9 they would need to stay competitive.
Again, that doesn't make any sense. Anyone who pays for MSDN access can get early access to windows 9, and, somewhat surprisingly, directx 8 code still works on windows 8, so there's not real reason to believe that source engine games are suddenly going to stop working any more than anything else could suddenly stop working.
Except for anti-malware/antivirus vendors. Those folk really have nowhere else to go
They're usually security companies, not just AV companies. There's still a market for intrusion detection, forensics, recovery etc. There is even a place for malware protection on linux and mac if they ever pick up market share, and there's a place for AV on mobile devices these days too.
You're talking a lot of nonsense unfortunately.
Conventional wisdom is wrong about why Windows (Score:2)
Yes, the lack of commercial games is a barrier to Linux. It's not even close to the largest barrier to mass market adoption on the desktop: The largest barrier to Linux adoption, by far, is that your typical computer comes with MS Windows or OS X, and both of those are decent enough to do what most computer users want to do, which is check their email, stay in touch on Facebook, browse the news, view video on Youtube, etc. They don't need to make a change, so they don't.
An obligatory car analogy: If your Fo
Re: (Score:2)
Linux adoption needs to happen in business first. Linux can compete with Windows in that arena. It's going to take a long time before we can consume content on Linux effectively. It's not a technical problem, it's a lack of interest from DRM loving companies.
Linux needs business apps and lots of them. They need quickbooks, good office suites, clients for various ibm and oracle products, etc. If anything, the lack of consuming content can be a feature right now in this space. It means the employees won
Re: (Score:2)
Linux has lots of business apps. RHEL (RedHat Enterprise Linux) comes with a stack of them.
I had a little cry when I migrated from 4D6* and Seagate Info**, which I'd been using for years, to RHEL, where I had to take everything I'd learned from the previous solution and bin it, and learn a whole new syntax. It was hard. I wouldn't honestly recommend a migration from an NT based SAP solution to Linux, it's something you need to go into with a virgin mind or it'll fuck you up.
*Long gone 4th Generation busines
Re:Conventional wisdom is wrong about why Windows (Score:5, Interesting)
I began using Microsoft operating systems in the late 1980's. I used them every single day that I used a computer until about a year ago when I decided to give Ubuntu a try.
I now use Ubuntu every single day I use a computer, I do reboot occasionally to use Windows for games, aside from that I do not use Windows at all.
The only shortcomings I have come across is my dependence upon Photoshop (yes, I now run PS in wine) and that of my games. Aside from that, every other thing for which my computer is used, Ubuntu just works, and does works with more stability that Windows has ever shown in more than 2 decades of use.
So when you say "runs circles around those same offerings on Linux" I will have to disagree, in fact, that statement is only partially true under some circumstances for specific applications, the exception rather than the rule. As a Linux n00b, I have more stability, better response, less overhead and an all around better experience than Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
The only shortcomings I have come across is my dependence upon Photoshop (yes, I now run PS in wine)
I actually hear this allot however I would normally reply "Use the GIMP" which IMHO is just as good as Photoshop. Unfortunately you mentioned you are dependent on Photoshop and run it under WINE so my reply to you would be to stick with what you are familiar with since trying to move to the GIMP has a fairly steep learning curve although the basics are very easy to learn, sort of like Photoshop :)
For someone who has never used Photoshop or the GIMP the learning curve is about the same to get the appropria
Re:Conventional wisdom is wrong about why Windows (Score:4, Informative)
I actually hear this allot however I would normally reply "Use the GIMP" which IMHO is just as good as Photoshop.
No, GIMP is not as good as Photoshop. It is however quite competent for the things that most people need to do with an image editing program. For everyday users I would recommend GIMP, but for professional artists and photographers Photoshop is a better choice.
Re:More problems than that (Score:5, Insightful)
A big problem is just the concept of source distribution and the command line.
"Source distribution"? "Command line"? Where are you posting from, 1995?
as long as a legit response to a problem is "Oh just recompile your kernel," then it is forever destined not to be the everyman's OS
Good thing that stopped being the case about ten years ago, then...
Re: (Score:2)
what's really odd is that I've been using Linux for 15 years and never had to compile *anything*.
Re:Well that's wonderful (Score:5, Funny)
I'll make sure to let our Linux support lead know. He's been bashing his head against a wall trying to get SimpleScalar to compile on our systems for a class to use.
Right. Let's just recall what you were asserting here: that the "everyman" won't use Linux because he finds the command line "scary". Now your "everyman" (who, it suddenly turns out, is also your Linux support lead) wishes to install SimpleScalar, a "system software infrastructure used to build modeling applications for program performance analysis, detailed microarchitectural modeling, and hardware-software co-verification". Despite his evident technical acumen, Everyman is terrified by the notion that he must run a compiler to perform detailed microarchitectural modelling.
"Sod this" says Everyman. "I'm going back to Windows!".
Then he discovers that, on Windows, you also have to build SimpleScalar from source. Poor old Everyman! He should never have applied for that job as Linux Support Lead.
Re: (Score:2)
You sound gay. "pro audio" - yeah right, Mr Internet Tough Guy.
Re: (Score:2)
as long as a legit response to a problem is "Oh just recompile your kernel," then it is forever destined not to be the everyman's OS.
Kernel recompiles are not needed by 99% of users those days. In fact, the average user will probably never need to compile anything.
Maybe (Score:5, Interesting)
It'll depend on two big things:
1) The willingness of Linux users to pay for software. Big name games are not going to go OSS, they are not going to be free, they are not going to function off of donations. They cost too much money for that. When you sink $10-30 million in making a game, you have to have a way to make it back. Unfortunately I've met more than a few Linux users who think all software should be no cost, they are just unwilling to consider paying for something. Others will pay, but only a small amount. So we'll have to see how many people are willing to pay, if it is enough to cover the costs of porting and supporting.
2) Linux getting a better graphics setup. Right now there's a real problem with regards to using modern features of GPUs. The binary nVidia drivers provide OpenGL 4.2 and are fast and stable, but that is about it. So if a game wants to use new technology, and more and more do, then there's a real issue with what you support. Ask Mozilla about the problems they had with GPU acceleration under Linux. It was a case of "It works well with binary nVidia, but has X crashing bugs with anything else." That isn't a setup that will be ok for many game companies, particularly if the expectation is that they scale things back or do tons of work and hacking to support various chips/drivers, since that'll increase the cost of doing it.
It'll all come down to money, as it always will in business. The desktop Linux market is not that large so there isn't a huge amount of people to tap in to. Thus how with it it will be will depend on what percentage of people will pay, and what it costs to support. If a high percentage of people are willing to pay for the games, and ports are rather easy, then you probably will see it on the uptick.
I mean if I'm running a publisher and the finance people say "For about $50,000 in development testing and support we can add Linux as a platform and even conservatively we can expect $500,000 in additional sales, and $1,000,000 is fairly realistic," well I'll do it. Why not? Even if I'm looking at $100,000,000 in sales on other platforms a small investment with a good reward is a great idea.
However it is is more along the lines of "It'll cost us at least $500,000 to get everything working and there will still be bugs with AMD cards, and at best we could see maybe $600,000 in sales, but realistically probably half that or less," then I'll say no. It is not worth the risk of lost money for a small potential of a small reward. Just stick with the other platforms.
So at this point, we really can't say. We'll have to see how Valve does, and in particular some of the Kickstarted games. The Linux people were very, very vocal so many games added a Linux port. However we'll have to see what it ends up taking to make, how well it works, and how Linux sales of it goes. That'll likely determine if those companies try Linux again, and other companies will see their success or failure and decide what to do.
Re: (Score:2)
I definitely get your argument that Linux users tend to expect things for free.
However, I think that the majority of people who are excited about the prospect of gaming on Linux are definitely those who are willing to pay for software.
I mean, most of them have spent $100+ for the privilege to play games, aka Windows.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Maybe (Score:5, Interesting)
Gabe Newell used to work at Microsoft. He knows about Stac and Sendo, WordPerfect, Novell, Lotus, Aldus, Borland, Netscape and the entire litany of other companies Microsoft decided had had enough time to develop an interesting basket of customers to steal. He knows Microsoft has now decided to have his share, and he cannot defeat them while working on their operating system. That strategy always fails because Microsoft deliberately makes the operating system incompatible with their victims' software. Always. He knows he cannot win on Windows in the long term.
That doesn't mean he's abandoning Windows immediately. Of course not. The money's still coming in and there's no reason to throw it away. But right here in this thread are the first trickle of "increasingly glitchy, unreliable, unstable..." that eventually will become a flood not because Valve suddenly forgot how to write code, but because the ware cannot transcend an OS that deliberately undermines it. It is just not possible . It's not Gabe that's going to take Valve on Windows away from you: it's Microsoft, who will make it work worse and worse until you uninstall it.
So the man has no choice. It's this or fold your tent and retire to your private island.
No my argument is not invalid (Score:2)
Because Valve is the only company out there for who the majority of revenues is dependent on selling other people's software through digital distribution. Most other developers don't have their own DD service (only EA and Ubisoft do that I know of), they make their money selling games which they can do anywhere, on Valve's Steam on MS's marketplace, in Walmart, whatever.
I also don't know that I buy Valve's argument that MS's store will kill them. It may well become the big way to buy software for Windows bu
Re: (Score:3)
You said it yourself: Steam has 90% of the PC games revenue, and the same issue affects the other 10% too. The fraction of game sale revenue your comment applies to is therefore at best a fringe 5%. Little enough to be not relevant to the broad scope of the discussion. You're picking at nits.
Microsoft has decided that Valve has fattened itself enough to be harvested. That's how Microsoft sees the ISV market: grazing cattle, some who fail, some who wander about doing nothing but making more cattle, and
Re: (Score:2)
Come play! Here, we have a pen drive you can boot to that doesn't have this buggy Windows crap."
Don't worry, Microsoft is working on fixing that little vulnerability as well. With grandson-of-UEFI in place, nobody is going to boot anything but Windows 11 and later versions.
It's for "security reasons," dontcha know.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"More like Microsoft has a chance of created a walled garden that beats Valve's walled garden."
No, Microsoft owns the OS and can make it as incompatible with Valve's software as they made it incompatible with the software from dozens of others including Borland, Lotus, WordPerfect and others. Gabe Newell knows this because he was actually there and participated in this activity as a Microsoft employee. He knew this was coming and prepared for it many years ago.
If Microsoft wants to build game cred after
Paying for Linux versions is insufficient ... (Score:3)
... The willingness of Linux users to pay for software ...
Being willing to pay for a Linux version of a game is insufficient. With most Linux gamers already buying the Windows version and dual booting or running under Wine these gamers are already customers. Its only new customers who justify the Linux version, not someone switching from the Windows version to a Linux version.
Re: (Score:3)
Riiiiight.... and all Windows users just love to pirate, arrrrh, matey!
Last times I checked the average amount paid by Linux users was higher than Windows for the Humble Bundle
The fact that Linux users have to use that (Score:3)
Proves the problem. Linux users sprain their elbows they reach over and pat themselves on the back so hard because they spent $10 on average as opposed to the $6 Windows users spent... Except that $10 works out to like $2/game. People are cheapskates on the Humble bundle. Few pay what is actually a reasonable amount and many Window gamers have already paid more.
I've never bought a humble bundle because I have already owned any games from them I've wanted. Usually the price per game I pay is $10-20. World of
Re: (Score:2)
>Last times I checked the average amount paid by Linux users was higher than Windows for the Humble Bundle
Does it mean that companies can charge $80 on Linux for $60 Windows games?
I hear people pointing to this factoid but it's simply not true at all. Since people on Linux have a limited choice of games, they'd pay more for games supporting Linux.
Re: (Score:3)
I think Kickstarter can maybe help with the profitability issue.
I would think that for most developers, there's some number of dollars, no matter how large, that would make them willing do to a Linux port. The key is getting developers to go for this.
For example, I would have figured that the Torchlight 2 developers would be up for attempting a Linux port funded by Kickstarter, since they're also supporting Mac. But they're pretty plainly saying they're not interested in pursuing a Linux port. Not sure w
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a comprehensive answer to the question, but the makers of the Humble Bundles (packs of mostly cross-platform indie games sold through a name-your-own price model) publish their sales figures [humblebundle.com], and they consistently show Linux-using buyers choosing to pay more than Windows and Mac buyers do -- sometimes much mor
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Commercial games already made it to Linux (Score:2)
Geez, some folks have short memories. There already were plenty of commercial games for Linux. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Loki weren't bankrupted, they were merged into Tux Games.
Please get your facts right.
Re: (Score:2)
The question was "Are Commercial Games Finally Going To Make It To Linux?", and MrEricSir answered quite correctly. Commercial games have been made for Linux in the past. It is true that the lack of success previously does not present a good case for the assumptions made in the summary because it is entirely based on the idea that the major games have never been ported before, and so if they did it now then they would find a viable market.
It is fairly obvious really. There are two statements to this argumen
Re: (Score:2)
Problem is people don't just want commercial games. They want the popular games, games they've heard of, games that their friends play. Humble Bundle may be great, but those are games that attract a niche audience really.
Let it be so (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So what you're saying is that the best thing wouldn't be Linux, but Google.
Not likely, I'm afraid (Score:3)
Some game developers might support Linux if it comes essentially for free - e.g., because they're developing using Unity, or the game just runs under Wine. But even then, with current adoption numbers of Linux for desktop, the cost of testing, packaging, retailing and supporting is going to be more than revenues for most publishers. Sure, Indie developers are loving Linux, but their costs and expectation of profit are far lower than the big studios.
It's worth looking at what's going on with the Mac. Around a quarter of university students are using Macs these days, yet the Steam store for mac is a pathetic shadow of the store for Windows.
I wouldn't throw away your Windows partition just yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering how hard it is to convince some developers to "port" their PS3/360 games to Windows when their engine already supports it, somehow I doubt many developers are going to release a Linux port just because the engine supports it.
Nothing new (Score:3)
These guys [tuxgames.com] have been running since 2000. They not only sell commercial games ported to Linux, they do some of the porting themselves.
Oh, and here [wikipedia.org] is their wiki page.
Disclaimer: I know the founder.
Oh, really (Score:2)
'Nobody will use Linux because there are no good games.'
Someone please tell that to my Frozen Bubble addicted wife.
Re: (Score:3)
Frozen Bubble is just a port of bust-a-move. You can buy it on every platform under the sun. Hell, I've seen at least 3 DIFFERENT ports of it on iPad alone. (None of which give credit to the original, of course.)
If Frozen Bubble is your best selling point, you got problems.
Linux has no advantage over windows.... (Score:5, Insightful)
... when it comes to games. If linux made a performance distro FOR games that was significantly faster then windows in terms of framerates/etc only then would people think of changing.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with this guy. Gamers will jump ship if they think installing Linux will make their games run, say, twice as fast. They are always looking for the best platform available. (Which is why C64 was popular even while the 1983 videogame crash was happening.) (And why most serious gamers owned Amigas in the 80s not PCs.)
Ya but you can't do that (Score:4, Informative)
The thing is that OS overhead on Windows isn't all that high. It offers pretty efficient access to the GPU, particularly if you use DX10 or newer (which games are starting to do more and more). So there isn't huge gains to be made in Linux. Even if you designed the most optimized path possible, it just wouldn't offer 2x improvement. It might not even offer a 5% improvement.
As it stands right now I don't know what if any improvements it would offer. Valve has a small improvement, however you have to remember that is with very old code on Windows, and a new port on Linux. If they went back and optimized their Windows renderer the difference might shrink, vanish, or even go the other way. We need more information to see generally if there is any performance improvement and from this data point if there is, it is probably quite small.
Re:Linux has no advantage over windows.... (Score:5, Informative)
Windows (DirectX): 270.6 FPS
Windows (OpenGL): 303.4 FPS
Linux: 315 FPS
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
... when it comes to games. If linux made a performance distro FOR games that was significantly faster then windows in terms of framerates/etc only then would people think of changing.
Do you really think so? Why would people start switching when there are already so many game console games? smartphone/tablet games? online games? and even now new TV-set top box games or smart TV games? Do you really believe that PC-only games are as important a reason to switch to Linux as it was 10 years ago?
The reason most people are not switching to linux is just because they don't see much broken with their current Windows system. And it takes much more energy to try something new then keeping with th
I probably represent a sizable chunk of people, (Score:3)
I'd like to switch to Linux - not for any great philosophical/political reason, just I'd quite like to learn about it - and that would require installing and using it.
I'd installed Live discs, and dual-booted over the years, but never really made any progress after the first couple of days of working out how to do something and then giving up in frustration (MythTV, you're to blame for my last aborted attempt).
For me gaming is definitely one thing I want to do, and I know I'll have major issues with in Linux - but that's not the main reason. Well it's part of the main reason, which I will badly sum up as "There's nothing I need from Linux I can't do in Windows - and whilst there's plenty of tasks I'm sure I can get Linux to do, knowing I'll never get something I want working just makes it all feel a bit pointless"
Still not to say I'm giving up, just saying that my Windows install on my main desktop isn't going anywhere for quite some time. Current plan is to replace my aged ReadyNAS with a proper home server - and for that, Linux looks perfect.
Android / OUYA (Score:2)
One of which is Android. There are some pretty decent FPS games running on the SGS3 in 720p.
The other one is the OUYA project, which is also built on Android. They've already raised over $8.5 million and they havent even shipped a console yet.
Will the big publishers follow suit? Who cares? The point is a new market for gaming is emerging. Competition will allow new big publishers to emerge.
Re: (Score:3)
I think TFS misses on two big points that are helping to bring gaming to Linux.
One of which is Android. There are some pretty decent FPS games running on the SGS3 in 720p.
Android game development is probably doing Linux game development a disservice.
Basically, every variation of hardware and ROM is a debugging and support nightmare. Code that works on one device doesn't necessarily do so on the next. Fixing the bug on the next frequently introduces new bugs on the first. Heck, you can't even trust the same devices to work consistently, because they occasionally get subtle hardware changes.
Typically, you eat the extra development costs and develop on Android to try it out. Yo
Better do something (Score:2)
Games are the only software worth paying for (Score:2, Insightful)
"Nobody will use Linux because" (Score:2)
for the most part its a pain in the ass to use that doesnt run the software people want, it doesnt matter if its games, photoshop or MS office, people are not going to put themselves in a position where they are subject to more grief and less benefits
linux is fine where it is, quit trying to shoehorn it where it doesnt belong
finally? (Score:2)
"dontwant" (Score:2)
By the way little tagger, it's "donotwant", as in Star Wars Episode III.
That said, i'm all for it. We had the short-lived Loki then and the unsuccessful TuxGames more recently.
A great step... (Score:2)
Wine (Score:4, Insightful)
Why do people keep forgetting wine? Every day, more and more games work out of the box. Several high end big commercial games just worked perfectly out of the box the day they were release in recent months with no issues at all (ie: Mass Effect 3).
I think what's still missing is promoting wine if you want people to game on linux.
However, I should point something out; if you care about FLOSS, you then you wouldn't promote stuff like Steam (DRM-infested), which goes completely against FLOSS.
Re: (Score:3)
... where most people thinks they are entitled to have everything free...
Most people using linux think"s" assuming the cart is before the horse in lieu of a viable gaming title is a bit premature. Let's wait until the steam port is done, shall we?
Re: (Score:2)
I know I shouldn't but
The difference between a Windows User and a Linux User is that while the windows user also wants everything for free too, as demonstrated by "massive piracy" The Linux user rejects pirating commercial software and chooses the honourable choice of open source instead.
People buy software for android, maybe pirate some and will use the ad supported versions too. Personally i've never had a problem paying for commercial software on android especially since it is licensed to me and I can i
Re: (Score:2)
hm... for an old vs new comparison you need to compare what old Windows games will run on current platforms as well.
For example, will Alpha Centauri run on Win7? No.
Will SU-27 Flanker? No.
Will Command & Conquer? No.
Will Red Alert? No. RA2 will. Yuri's Revenge will.
Will Homeworld Cataclysm? No. Surprisingly, Homeworld 1 will.
Will Warbirds? No.
Will XWing Vs. Tie Fighter? No.
Games that will run on Win7: Unreal Tournament 2002, UT2003, Microsoft Flight Simulator 2000, Stronghold, Need For Speed: Underground
Re: (Score:2)
> Seriously, I've got a half dozen old 'Linux games' from the first time around, and of those, none of their original binaries will run on a current linux distro
I still run CivCTP and SimCity 3000. Kohan and Majesty and SMAC do well too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is also #4. It's not WinDOS.
"Being mainstream" is not the problem with Windows and viruses. The problem with Windows is a refusal to learn from the mistakes of others or even your own mistakes. Windows started with a lot of nasty legacy stuff to support and just added more cruft over the years.
A lot of stuff on Windows still screams "single user system".
Re: (Score:2)
The video game industry takes in far more revenue than the operating system industry. It takes in more revenue than Hollywood. In fact, it takes in more revenue than OSes and Hollywood combined!
Having all of the (currently Windows-based) gamers move over to Linux would certainly break the Windows monopoly.
Have you done the arithmetic?