Linux support? official or unofficial. POLL!

[CToxin]

@Falcon_BR

The reason why the game can't be ported is more to do with the fact it is written in DX than that they use Physx.

Also the whole memory and 64bit client thing is a bit false as the game is Large Address Aware and therefore gets all the memory it needs. Also, memory allocation is not a bottleneck, but the transfer of that memory may be, but blah blah pointless technobobble that no one but a CS/CPE/SE would understand. Suffice to say, that any memory bottleneck is mostly based on hardware and current technological limitations. Not saying the game can't be optimized better, but allowing it to use more memory won't solve it. Unless of course you are rich enough to afford 12GB+ of SRAM and load the entire game onto memory (note: you can't get SRAM chips).

[Pella]

Hipster's use Linux.

Gamers use Windows.

[Rahabib]

Originally Posted by Pella

Hipster's use Linux.

Gamers use Windows.

I hope its cozy under that bridge

[Rahabib]

Originally Posted by Hamma

Linux is not a gaming platform, I'd rather dev time not be spent on this.

Linux is whatever people want it to be. It can run games perfectly fine when they are developed for it. Same as a Mac. Same as an Xbox 360.

I would rather they add features to the game to make it more enjoyable first, but writing linux off like this is like saying you can only run Photoshop on a Mac.

[AThreatToYou]

The reason why I advocate getting PS2 functioning under Linux is due to the Microsoft's recent silliness. Sooner or later Windows is going to fall out of favor, and if it happens within PS2's lifetime, it could mean a lot for SOE's sales if they make the gates to be one of the first AAA, F2P MMO-shooter games available on Linux (or Mac) natively after Windows craps out. I think Smed intended to run PS2 for 10 years didn't he? Then he really should have thought about (and ordered) some in-engine planning for Linux/Mac h4x.

(Mac support pretty much means Linux support)

[CToxin]

Originally Posted by Rahabib

Linux is whatever people want it to be. It can run games perfectly fine when they are developed for it. Same as a Mac. Same as an Xbox 360.

I would rather they add features to the game to make it more enjoyable first, but writing linux off like this is like saying you can only run Photoshop on a Mac.

Actually, he is pretty accurate. Unix is not very game friendly because only openGL works on it and most games (the ones with the pretty pictures at least) use DirectX. Wine gets around this by translating the DirectX instructions to OpenGL instructions (if I remember correctly), but many instructions can't be translated, because there is no OpenGL equivalent. This is why most modern AAA titles don't work very well with wine (at least one of the reasons).

The reason why it takes a few years for a Mac port to appear for a PC game is that the engine has to be reworked for OpenGL. For example, COD:MW2 has been out for quite a long time now, but there is still no native Mac client (that I can find).

Also, I'm not sure what your Photoshop remark is about considering that Photoshop tends to run better on Windows.

[Gimpylung]

Originally Posted by Falcon_br

I also think SOE should focus on doing a 64 bits client of the game, before doing a Linux version of it.

Agreed.

[CToxin]

I apologize for getting "Superior Engineer Master Race" in this thread, but can those that don't even have a basic understanding of how programming works stop saying the same things? I can only repeat myself so many times.

Also, Windows isn't going to go out of favor with gaming until someone can get them to open DirectX to other platforms.

[Rahabib]

Originally Posted by CToxin

Actually, he is pretty accurate. Unix is not very game friendly because only openGL works on it and most games (the ones with the pretty pictures at least) use DirectX. Wine gets around this by translating the DirectX instructions to OpenGL instructions (if I remember correctly), but many instructions can't be translated, because there is no OpenGL equivalent. This is why most modern AAA titles don't work very well with wine (at least one of the reasons).

The reason why it takes a few years for a Mac port to appear for a PC game is that the engine has to be reworked for OpenGL. For example, COD:MW2 has been out for quite a long time now, but there is still no native Mac client (that I can find).

Also, I'm not sure what your Photoshop remark is about considering that Photoshop tends to run better on Windows.

but thats the decision of the developers to use DX in the first place. OpenGL is a capable renderer and works just fine if developers choose to do so in the first place. DX simply got a foothold before OGL could really gain traction. Development kits started off using DX because it MS bought up all the good middle ware to perform better and OGL wasn't the greatest performer historically. As a result, DX became the standard, especially since it had far more resources than OGL had. Over the years however, OGL is actually must better and very capable. Shaders etc. are different because DX isnt open. OGL is actually cheaper to use licensing wise since its open source. Have you gamed on Linux lately - or even used it for any length of time? It works wonderful, and Valve seems to think its not a waste of time.

The Photoshop arguement comes from all the graphic designers, especially in the 90s, insisting that Photoshop is better suited on a Mac than Windows. Adobe gained popularity on the Mac so thats what graphic designers were used to. Its a stupid argument since the performance is pretty much equal anyway - and always has been. So just like you can run Photoshop on Windows, you *can* game just fine on a Mac or Linux as long as the game supports OpenGL. OpenGL isnt the sluggish performer it was 7-8 years ago.

And as far as wine - I hate wine with a passion. IMO, if SOE was going to do this, I would prefer they just port it properly.

Is it worth it? I could argue it is, but the fact is the population of linux users is small in comparison. However, that will not change if people like me are forced to dual boot windows to game. Given the choice, I would game in Linux. Its faster (the general OS environment is), and the experience is far more customizable. As soon as driver developers, and game developers get going, it is just as capable to game as Windows. Ever since Steam made the port, I have seen more driver updates than I have seen in years. Its only going to get better.

[Emperor Newt]

Originally Posted by CToxin

Actually, he is pretty accurate. Unix is not very game friendly because only openGL works on it and most games (the ones with the pretty pictures at least) use DirectX.

Maybe it's just bad phrasing but I think you know that the majority of games being made for DirectX doesn't make Linux "unfriendly" towards games. If you want to put it that way, then games are not Linux friendly. Not the other way round.

but many instructions can't be translated, because there is no OpenGL equivalent

Often there is (as I can't think of anything right now that directx can do that opengl, at least in theory, isn't able to do), but often the problem simply is that you cannot do a simple "translation" to get the same outcome. That would require to write extra code within an extra bottles just to get a specific game working. And even then it's not guaranteed to work and also something else can (and most likely will) break. Understandably almost nobody is willing to do that. Sometimes such patches make it into Wine, but they are very rare.

*edit*
Edited something out. In the end I would have to agree that this would be even more nitpicking

[Ait'al]

Could they keep some low lv stuff in the game that is more likely to work in wine for when it translates to opengl in wine andhence support it? Linux people will not be picky about high end graphics support. But if it supports up to dx9 we could always play it on that lv(through wine translations) and windows at higher. Then you are working within current parameters of development. Like I said I would, even, take unofficial support and just some help. Maybe that or just helping figure out how to get it to work in wine. Minimal support. Just help the community a tiny bit here and there. Aren't either of those feasible?

Basically low lv graphics considerations for what is supported easily in wine and or help getting it working in wine. With or without any guarantees. They could do it to see how hard it is to do... It's not unrealistic for wine or linux to support slightly lower graphics more commenly. So try to allow it to work in one form or another where it is most likely too without deverting much from the current work. Deversity of considerations for programming makes good practice too. Might give some of their guys some good xp and make them more efficient more quickly. Could work out in the end for everyone. That sort of thing usually does.

[Hamma]

Originally Posted by Rahabib

Linux is whatever people want it to be. It can run games perfectly fine when they are developed for it. Same as a Mac. Same as an Xbox 360.

I would rather they add features to the game to make it more enjoyable first, but writing linux off like this is like saying you can only run Photoshop on a Mac.

I'm a Linux guy - I have various certifications and run several servers that do Linux. But I don't run Linux on my desktop, to me it's a server OS and that's what it's best at. OSX to me is more of a gaming platform than Linux because it's meant to be a desktop OS whereas there massive variation of Linux distributions mostly built for servers make it even harder to develop Linux clients.

Then of course you have the DirectX issue.

[Rahabib]

Originally Posted by Hamma

I'm a Linux guy - I have various certifications and run several servers that do Linux. But I don't run Linux on my desktop, to me it's a server OS and that's what it's best at. OSX to me is more of a gaming platform than Linux because it's meant to be a desktop OS whereas there massive variation of Linux distributions mostly built for servers make it even harder to develop Linux clients.

Then of course you have the DirectX issue.

I am not sure why people pigeonhole linux as just for "servers." I run it as a desktop, server, gaming platform, etc. I run L4D2 natively just fine - in fact it actually runs slightly better than it does in windows 7 (same computer). The only major thing holding games back is the DX issue. The games that run OGL run just as well as the DX counterpart, its just that its easier to snag packaged development kits that are optimized for DX.

Also, a lot depends on the distro you use. If you choose a spartan distro you will have a spartan experience (and some people like that). But if you want a whole desktop experience, you can try Ubuntu with Unity or KDE or a "spin off" like Mint. I cant think of any functional experience in windows that hasn't been done in a distro. Hell you can even make Ubuntu into Windows.

But you are right, its a great server OS as well

[AThreatToYou]

Originally Posted by CToxin

Also, Windows isn't going to go out of favor with gaming until someone can get them to open DirectX to other platforms.

You make an excellent point that I have considered very thoroughly. It all boils down to: Anyone would be correct in saying that Windows essentially has the market cornered with DirectX for PC Gaming. However, it is entirely possible Microsoft will have to sell DirectX in order to stay afloat.

And fold this: I'm no programmer or hardware/software engineer, but as I understand it, a Mac/OSX port essentially means a Linux port with little to no work from a community source.

[Rbstr]

Originally Posted by AThreatToYou

However, it is entirely possible Microsoft will have to sell DirectX in order to stay afloat.

When..like 2035?
They're profitable and still sitting on several billions of cash.