Linux Gaming: Looking Back And Looking Forward 158
James Hills writes: "Gamespy.com has released their end of the year Linux retrospective , "Operating system historians will record the year 2000 as the year that Linux gaming began to become a serious prospect for both gamers and developers. While many things still need to be resolved for Linux gaming to seriously compete with Windows gaming, companies such as Mandrake, Red Hat, SuSe, nVidia, 3Dfx, Loki, Vicarious Visions, Tribsoft, Hyperion Entertainment, and thousands of programmers working on projects such as KDE, Gnome, and Xfree86 have begun to make gaming in Linux gaming a more mainstream concept. Through the efforts of corporate investors and individual netizens, the Linux gaming market experienced tremendous improvements in all areas last year and the year 2001 looks even brighter. ""
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:1)
Point 1>
If what you were saying was true then there wouldn't be any good free open source software available now.
Point 3>
PSX CD's and bajillions of other PC games are duped, copied and "ripped off left and right" but Sony, Blizzard, etc. seem to be doing fine. This is just like the claptrap the recording industry always spews against MP3 distributers.
Re:Gaming Learning Curve (Score:2)
--
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:1)
Re:Linux only platform game (Score:1)
If you want to see more software like this in the future, then pay them; because otherwise, you can't expect anything in return.
I stay as far away from 'copyright infringing' on software as I can. I wouldn't touch it with a 20' pole.
The reason is that by following the liscences and restrictions, I see just how good/bad they are.
This has really shown me the benefit of Free software (GPL, BSD, etc.) over non-Free.
--
Re:I've re-installed my Windows partition (Score:4)
The only downside of the next product is that initially it will probably only work at full feature level with the Nvidia OpenGL driver, but after the first test gets out (still a very long time in the future), I will jump back in to the driver development to try and bring the other open source drivers up to par.
John Carmack
its not that much linux fault (Score:1)
Open GL is currently having a Extension explosion where a lot of new extensions compleatly changes the way open GL is used. This makes it very dificult to use.
What is even more alarming is that there are people out ther working on new API designs like SMASH for OpenGL but they are ignored by the Open GL ARB. Soon we will need a alternative open API [obsession.se]
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:1)
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:2)
Actually, I've had Windows game installations queer my system. I even had the Install Wizard render my system unbootable when I removed a game.
That kind of nonsense is one of the reasons I run Linux on my desktop now.
> With SFP in W2K, DLL hell is near 100% myth - it's not possible unless you disable SFP.
I'm sure lots of consumers run out and buy W2K so they can play games.
--
yeah freedom (Score:1)
Cheap Bandwidth (Score:2)
I started writing a Tradewars clone called Merchant Empires about 6 months ago. I can fairly saturate my 768K DSL line now with all of the game traffic during peak times. I do this from two server running Mandrake that are installed in a friend's closet.
Cheap bandwidth, which will probably only increase in pipe size and reduce in price, is now creating a completely new and incredible environment for writing and playing large scale, multiplayer games. This is a phenomena that will only increase as projects like WorldForge reach maturity.
Re:I've re-installed my Windows partition (Score:1)
Your anti-Loki campaign frankly sucks. So what if you had a problem with a distributor. I think Loki has cranked out an AMPLE supply of games that never would have made the light of day in Linux.
You say your not please with their attitude towards you, well, I think it goes both ways. I've read you posts on their newsgroups and thay are not too constructive.
I guess some people are just pricks...who can never be pleased.
W2K for Games (Score:2)
I have Macintosh for almost everything
I have Win2K for Games. I was running NT4 but one day it blew up on me and I thought, what the heck, I'll put Win2K on it for a change. A hell of alot better for games than NT4. As for why I wasn't running Win9x...because there's no SMP support in it.
So there's a consumer with W2K for playing games
Re:sdl (Score:1)
I don't see a company committing to a technology they have no control over.
sdl changes enough - it becomes a tech support hell - and thats a money hole.
... and we all know Linux gaming isn't a big money maker as it is.
Re:have none (Score:1)
Re:Thank you Mr. Carmack (Score:1)
GPL not necessarily good for games (Score:2)
But GPL-gaming is an interesting subject:
While the GPL works good for applications, games are of a totally different nature.
Sure, some good GPL-games exists, but no opensource project could _possibly_ afford all the work that goes into most top-10 games.
One of the reasons is that a game, unlike an application normally has a very short lifespan. Once you've finished it, theres not much more to it, and thus interest fades.
Games need to sell A LOT on a short period for it to be successful, and getting revenue from support or services is not that much of an option.
That said, there might be exceptions:
1. Multiplayer games may have a long enough lifespan for it to work, and if they use an existing game-engine, it might be feasible.
2. For a massive online-game, it may be possible that the service of being connected may provide enough revenue. But of course, nothing is stopping others from creating lots of competing online-games.
The possibility IMHO exists in reusing GPL'd game-engines. A lot of work in the corporate world seems wasted because most games are written from scratch.
Cross platform design is the biggest issue (Score:3)
Linux consoles? (Score:1)
The next generation(tm) of games consoles will move towards standard configurations of commodity hardware. The Xbox is heading in that direction, but I think others will go much further. This could see linux make it into every household sooner than we thought.
Re:Linux Game box (Score:1)
Thank you for your deep insight into the world of copywrite law.. it was very enlightning.
Yeah right... (Score:2)
Most "mainstream people" think that linux is about free... why would you install linux (as a mainstream joe not a serious programmer or nerd). It's free, it's the new hype thing, bla bla bla... truth is it's not as easy as window for the average joe to setup for playing, AND mainstream joe is used to the concept of everything on that platform is free, why the heck would he shell out $$ for an alternative OS that he probably doesn't even use as a main one.
Look at what happened with Quake 3, the linux port was quoted not to give the results as expected. Don't get me wrong, an alternative is good, and it's good news, and linux is gaining support, that undeniable, but talking about it beeing a huge success and making a big deal out of it is a bit exagerating, I know a load of gamers, none of them even tried or considered shelling C$60 for a linux game if there's no advantages (performance, etc etc). It's hard to brake into an established market. Microsoft tried very hard since win95, and they've succeeded. They took years to do it, they've built strong support with hardware developpers, and on top of all, they are influencing the hardware buisness with "what's to come" (you want to be fully directX compliant these days else it looks bad against the competition, right?).
Anyways, there's one BIG positive aspect though, the linux community has a much higher average IQ than the windows crowd, (not a flame, an AVERAGE), so I guess the die-hard linux crowd, getting more and more by days, will know that they'll have to act if they want it to continue that way. that means *buying* software in the top of the list.
Makes me think when my amiga was "good only for games, wasn't a serious platform" and now you see linux striving to get the "gaming" tag the amiga had that was so negative... it's sad in a way to see linux stuck conceptually like the amiga was...
I'm waiting for a linux kernel with an amiga-like ease of use and frontend before committing myself to linux, right now, windows 2000 with 2 cpus is the best thing I ever ran since my miggy. But I am always opened to alternatives, as long as It doesn't take me 10 megs of help files and over-configuration to start a simple gui, which is also what mainstream joe wants. Call me stupid, but remember, gaming market is about gaming, not messing around an OS hours to make a game work or this or that... of course there's consoles for that matter too. Oh and all the different configs and linux setups out there, it must be hard to "standardise" everything in a stable fashion for games to run, so again, it's not for the average kid who wants to pop in a cd and play.
I would be cool tho if linux would have a performance edge in any way, but microsoft tweaked it's os and manufacturers the drivers tied to windows really good for that matter so I don't see linux taking over MS in the next year in the gaming area. But still, progress IS good news.
Damn gimme lightwave on linux
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:1)
I think that if the game developers treat their consumers with respect, then the people will be more likely to pay for their products.
I would be MUCH more likely to pay for a product that had no restrictions on use than one that had a liscence so restrictive that I felt that they assumed I was evil and would do everything in my power to destroy their business.
--
DRI has 3D support in CVS right now (Score:1)
Cheers,
--Maynard
Loki is a proprietary software company (Score:2)
Cheers,
--Maynard
Re:sdl (Score:2)
Companies are in the business of making profits. Profits come from changing technology to something that is supposedly 'new and improved' and charging the same markets for the product all over again.
It's a basic business model... if you can't increase your markets, then you exploit your available markets. Having many people committed to SDL will benefit SDL by allowing more people to have control over it. The technology is owned by the people who use it. Nobody pays a dime.
Re:Programming nitwit. (question) (Score:1)
--
Full plate and packing steel! -Minsc
Re:I've re-installed my Windows partition (Score:1)
Proprietary? (Score:1)
Proprietary my eye...OpenAL, SDL (not directly), SDKs for Linux, editing tools, etc.
Did you ever use fenris? Politely contact them? I think you need to read your post that you originally made concerning your problem. You used a public forum yourself.
..and I don't see anywhere in the Loki rep post that you were called a liar (unless this is in another newsgroup than the one I'm looking at.). I think she went on to say that they were working with their distributor to make shipping options more clear.
Re:Gaming Learning Curve (Score:1)
1. Insert boot CD
2. Wait until asked to insert the game CD
3. Insert game CD
4. Play the game
The boot cd could be updated from time to time to support new hardware, the game cds stay the same. And everybody will be happy since they do have to install anything...
Re:The ladder to success for linux gaming (Score:1)
I think that most of you have it wrong when you think that end users install windows. Most end users buy a computer with it already installed and configured. What they do is buy extras (hardware and software) that comes with self install (you install the CD into the drive - it automatically comes up and ask you to click on the install button - you select all the defaults and you are up and running).
When people buy hardware (PC or gaming) with Linux pre-installed and only then will software developers start developing games (in any serious way) for it.
I don't think that has to be as far off as the previous post implied, but I think it is more likely because a new hardware manufacturer enters the market with some down market home computing hardware that is not a PC.
My lone voice speaks truth. (Score:2)
All of that wouldn't matter to me if they had fixed their web page to make certain others couldn't get into the same bind I found myself in with their ordering and distribution system. They continue to allow these sorts of orders even after having had problems in the past. I do not respect this, nor will I stop my criticism. A lone voice, maybe. But I don't criticize for personal gain, nor out of hatred for the people who work for Loki. I do this entirely because I think it's the right thing to do; your (and many other's) derogatory name calling notwithstanding. And I will enjoy Alpha Centauri from Windows today, bought at a fraction of the cost off of a discount shelf I might add.
Cheers,
--Maynard
Comments from an game industry coder (Score:1)
I work in the game industry - I thought I'd share my personal views on the Linux/game situation.
First off, while I really admire the work John Carmack has done - I think people need to realize that the industry needs more buy-in then just John! He's in a unique position that he can take the time to improve the drivers, and mandate id's support ( I think ).
What we need to remember is that any other profitable (and relevant) company wouldn't, and won't, have their engineers working away on something that won't immediately contribute to the bottom line (let alone someone else's!) So, pepople droning about sdl, whatever. Doesn't matter. Companies don't want to have a dependence on something they don't control. Its both a technical risk, and a tech support nightmare (don't even get me started on distro differences - they're comparable to dll hell).
Earlier in this forum, someone mentioned the measure of sales might not be units sold. Hate to break it you buddy - thats all its about. My prediction is that you won't see first tier developers/publishers throw serious manpower behind Linux until they can ship a million units. Until then, it will be farmed out to small port shops - where there's very little risk to the original company.
As for the API wars - well, the war's been over for a while. DX won. Someone earlier asked of OpenGL will be available on the XBox - I'd be shocked if MS let that happen. They've done a great job on making OGL a bad buisness decision - why would they go back on it now. So - you can see what a great move for MS it was to secure the "universal" API... DX8 buys you XBox and PCs. Other consoles go to the metal. The profit margins here make proprietary engines worth it.
To sum up - to make Linux gaming happen, we have to prove a) there's a serious market for closed-source entertainment, b) an API exists that leverages existing code developers have for their existing games and c) a common delivery target - the distros have to have common game components - down to the version.
It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next 12 months - will Linux been relegated to a server-only domain for games, or will it become a first tier target market?
Anyways, just the viewpoint from a guy in the trenches. Who, by the way - hasn't given up hope
Cheers,
Re:The ladder to success for linux gaming (Score:1)
Re:sdl (Score:1)
Yes - as much as it hurts, you have to admit - that a) MS isn't going to deprecate or change the direction of a gaming technology and b) you can pretty well promise a minimum installed base on almost every machine.
I'm not saying that teh sdl people would do that - but it's a technical risk the suits don't like, and they're the ones who make the decisions - and pay my salary.
Re:Windows (Score:1)
Re:sdl (Score:2)
'Be' is hardly a 'large-corporation', but they abandoned all of the BeOS users by jumping on the embedded systems bandwagon and announcing no further development for the BeOS.
I do agree with your second point, that they will assure the installed base.
I think the problem with sdl is that it is still in its infancy and a may go in many different directions. Many open source projects are similar to this. But, there are also projects like Apache, Linux, Gimp, Perl, and others. Many companies could commit to Perl and Apache without worrying about the direction of the project changing. Once a project like SDL has a large enough userbase, it will stay on track, because the userbase are the people who develop it.
Re:I've re-installed my Windows partition (Score:1)
Closed vs Open Source (Score:4)
- - - - -
How to succeed in selling Games for Linux (Score:1)
1. Linux, for the end-user/desktop client comes in two flavors - geeks and appliance installs. The easiest one to sell to are Linux appliance installs.
2. Part of the problem is distribution. What we need is someone to sell the box that has the game manual, and separate out the cheat manuals and the strategy and add-ons manuals. That's where the money is.
3. What we need is Linux games that have a single install disk, download most of the code from a website (easier to patch and handle probs), and then you can get sold on all the other things.
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:3)
Multiplayer is where it's at, but not necessarily for a central commercial server. I never played Diablo2 on Blizzard's server after I saw the lag, I always play on a LAN. Same for UT. The purchase model is not going anywhere anytime soon, and bringing up cases where it could possibly work is not going to make everyone decide that commercial server games are the future.
-----------------------
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:1)
But Linux has recently begun attracting more Newbies.. but unlike Linux's past where these newbies needed help fscking their drives, mounting their drives.. these users do NOT want to know about mount/unmount or fsck. What they DO want is a distribution already setup with AutoMountD (amd), the lpp kernel patch, Gnome or KDE (although I'd recommend gnome), easy to setup PPP/broadband... make it so that the user can graphically configure an onboot pppd demand dialer, they want that! Have Hylafax or Sendfax setup with gfax or kfax..
That is what the emerging linux users want. They don't want no stinkin' rpms.. at least not in the current state, they want apt-get.. and not just regular apt-get, gnome-apt.
My users can click "My Computer" and "Control Panel" on their linux box.. Don't tell a user about their home directory, it is "My Documents".. These names aren't chosen only because of Microsoft, although that is one reason... a user does not know or want to know what "$HOME" is, they want to know their documents are there.. that is it! The simplier the better.
What the new users want, I have already given... and they like it. With the programs listed above, custom gnome-menus (using generic names, not the name of applications as is a common error), and a lot of Microsoft-made TrueType fonts, my users have never been happier.. well, except OpenOffice is too slow and buggy to actually be used on a Pentium Classic 133
Re:Sure, when it works. (Score:1)
--
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:2)
And I dispute number 2 as well. Version compatibility problems under Linux are dwarfed by the DLL Hell problem under Windows. And that problem hasn't exactly killed off gaming under Windows -- not by a long shot.
--
Soul Calibur coming... (Score:2)
Fight 1...
Klick, versus...
Hacker! Fight!
"3y3 4m 31337!" Insert repeatable unblockable move
WINNER! Hacker.
But the soul still burns!
--
Gonzo Granzeau
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:1)
But the game should include the ability to do modifications to the game itself (not the renderer or network code). The beauty of this is that if users want to get into the code and change how the works, how the attacks, etc. they can, and are encouraged to (ala Mods).
--
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Less Than 100 Paid Free Software Developers?!?! (Score:2)
The NSA people who designed NSA Secure Linux were being paid. I worked on an OSS project at university and was paid. The lead developers of this projects were paid as well (they didn't even have to teach classes, they are full time faculty who only work on this project).
Me too :-( (Score:1)
& Baldurs Gate II doesn't run in Linux...
--
Full plate and packing steel! -Minsc
Thanks. (Score:1)
Would a DX layer mean that everything accessing a sound card, video, joystick, etc would have to be rewritten or can it exist without interfering?
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:1)
Sure, there's nothing new in the world - nearly everything copies something. Hell, if you want you could say that Q3 is just Space Invaders with a flashier front end. These days though, top-notch graphics are a de-facto part of the game, so much so almost that the customer expects them to be there. Consider a car - would you be slightly disappointed if you bought a new car and found it didn't have a starter motor and you had to hand-crank it? The car may handle brilliantly, but the step between what you expect and what you get on the user-interface is likely to put you off.
Grab.
My experience with K7 + GeForce + Linux (help?) (Score:2)
With all that stuff installed, X dies when its launched. I've still got a few more ideas to try, and still a couple more resources to tap (friends, newsgroups, some anandtech articles, etc), but I'm about ready to head back to my former Linux now Win2k box (P2/333 + Voodoo3) to play Q3F until some decent information comes out or nVidia makes an easier install for my machine.)
---
Re:My lone voice speaks truth. (Score:1)
I remember the K5 article and I voted on it.
Re:Also need games that are relevent now... (Score:1)
Breakdown of Halflife by mod [gamespy.com] (over 29k counterstrike players when this was posted)
Re:Why don't businesses think like businesses? (Score:2)
Its simple, because 3D engines aren't the expensive part! Games have 4 times the numbers of artists and various other creative talent than programmers. The programmers themselves are really just a pretty small part. Thats why there are so few OS games. Because game production is a manufacturing process not a service process like so much network gear is. Its relatively easy to write the server, etc. but the art and plot of the game is the creative and expensive bottleneck.
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:1)
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:2)
Alright, I'm making an OS MMORPG. I make my money off subscription sales. Question: How do I secure my business model? What is to prevent a million people from copying me and destroying my customer base?
If everyone has access to the client and server code then anyone can run a server that can afford the hardware etc. I don't expect the hardware to be a big barrier to entry for that much longer though because its getting progressively cheaper.
In short, your business model would work for about a year or two. Maybe three if you don't release your server code (since you don't have to because it isn't actually distributed). Then other similar services will be up and probably as good as yours. They will also be cheaper since they didn't have to pay the original development costs for the software and you did. Suddenly your customer base has been cut a million different ways and your revenue drys up. You lose.
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:1)
Re:Linux will be the premire game emulation platfo (Score:1)
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:1)
Re:My experience with K7 + GeForce + Linux (help?) (Score:1)
It's a pity that you had to resort to slashdot for help though. It shouldn't be this to install and if you do get stuck it shouldn't be so tricky to find help.
I've re-installed my Windows partition (Score:3)
I own Terminus, Unreal Tournament, and about ten Loki games. I'm pleased with Vivarious Visions (and actually like Terminus)... but as many already know I'm NOT pleased with Loki, or their attitude towards this customer. So I don't buy their products any longer. Where is Alpha Centauri, or any reasonable explanation for this mess? Why do they continue to accept multiple pre-orders on their web page when they know it will hold up the delivery of other games purchased in the same order to their customers?
I'd love to see gaming take off under Linux, and think the software infrastructure should be in place once XFree-4 w/GLX and MesaGL, Linux-2.4 w/DRI, and a standardized base between distributions comes along. I'm guessing this will really fall into place by Redhat-8.0, which means about a year from now or so. Until then games authors are going to be forging a new Linux market and eating the support costs associated with the various incompatibilities between Linux distributions. Until this happens though I've given up. After buying twelve or so games for Linux in the hope that I could completely wipe out Windows in order to enjoy a few good games I've now come full circle and re-installed a Windows partition in order to game again. It's easier than dealing with this mess. Frankly, I'll be buying a PS2 ASAP (God knows when they'll be on store shelves) and am thinking of dumping PC gaming altogether.
Cheers!
--Maynard
The ladder to success for linux gaming (Score:4)
For linux gaming to become successful linux itself has to go mainstream, and it's falling short on ease of usability. The average gamer/user is not experienced enough (or do not have the time) to install and learn linux properly and install the games that are available for linux RIGHT NOW.
So once the game companies starts to see that even ordinary gamers/users installs linux with ease and has no problems in learning it then they will finally develop games for the platform and sell them through retail. IMHO linux still has a very long way to go before that happens.
Re:Linux only platform game (Score:1)
--
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re:I'll sum it all up. (Score:3)
And it didn't exist at all two years ago.
For the purposes of fortunetelling, it might be better to look at trends rather than a snapshot.
--
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:1)
--
Thank You! (Score:1)
Take Care,
--Maynard
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:1)
Wannabe competitors can copy or emulate your code. But they can't as easily duplicate the community and rich world you'd already have.
Then put your money where your mouth is. (Score:1)
Richard Stallman loves you.
-Don
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:2)
Yes but it is during the "slacking off" phase that you make the majority of your profits because it does take as much effort to stay on top once you get there. Under your model you breed competition for yourself, not necessarily a good thing. Besides any strictly coding improvement can be almost instantly implemented by your competitors with little to no cost to them. Since you have to stay the innovator to keep on top, you end up spending the majority of the development money and reaping few benefits for it.
Having to constantly work harder than your competition is not a recipe for success.
Counting on a good "community" to keep your customer base is nice, but how long will that last if you have to charge more than your competitors because you are forced into the role of innovator? Don't bet your business on intangibles like "community."
Re:Linux Game box (Score:1)
Dickens knew what they are all about...
``Are there no prisons?'' asked Scrooge.
``Plenty of prisons,'' said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.
``And the Union workhouses?'' demanded Scrooge. ``Are they still in operation?''
``They are. Still,'' returned the gentleman, `` I wish I could say they were not.''
``The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?'' said Scrooge.
``Both very busy, sir.''
``Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course,'' said Scrooge. ``I'm very glad to hear it.''
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:1)
In short, you aren't open sourcing the *GAME* per se, but the *ENGINE* that drives the game. Let's face it - you don't really want other people monkeying with your data files, maps, etc. Yes, they can copy them, but it's not legal, because those are components you pay for, and the license is written appropriately.
No, this is no barrier to the clients, but it does prevent another corporation from setting up a competing server. They can write another game based on the same engine. So can you - the real question then is, who can write the better game?
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:1)
-Don
Correction (Score:1)
Re:Thank You! (Score:1)
:)
I do hope that no matter what the problem it does get resolved for everyone involved.
Thank you Mr. Carmack (Score:2)
Thanks also for your games -- you don't know how much time I've wasted with your Quake games; entertainment money well spent.
Cheers,
--Maynard
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:1)
Besides any strictly coding improvement can be almost instantly implemented by your competitors with little to no cost to them.
Negative, for the exact same reason that you have a bit of lead time with your initial product. It takes time to reverse engineer (or just, if your product is open source, learn about and comprehend) any improvements you make. While your competitors do this, you make money off the improvements, and forge ahead with new ones.
Granted, you can make more profits - in the short term - by slacking off the innovation. But this almost inevitably comes at the cost of maintaining the lead which has generated your revenues to begin with, until you're just another competitor with no more profits than anyone else. And then you're in trouble.
One more thing:
Don't bet your business on intangibles like "community."
You'd be surprised how many sucessful businesses (like AOL) survive mainly by doing just that.
Re:yeah freedom (Score:1)
I'll support anyone's decision as long as it's based on good evidence.
--
Re:sdl (Score:1)
My point is that MS may depreciate or change the technology if it will gain them more money.
I agree - we've seen them do that - but they won't be abandoning something that a) has a stranglehold on the industry and b) they control exclusively.
They historically have dumped stuff when it became a liability to them.
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:2)
AOL survives on ease of implementation not on community. Everyone I know who has ever been on AOL started there because it was an easy place to get started. They all left AOL when they realized they were paying too much for what they were getting.
The problem with your model is that many people will go with a cheaper alternative than your bleeding edge game. The services your competitors provide will be essentially subsidized by your own efforts. It is substantially cheaper to reimplement your work than to develop it themselves. Your business model will be inherently more expensive than theirs because you must work harder than them to stay ahead. This is assuming you don't make a mistake and allow them to catch up. Once that happens your business model fails entirely.
Now if you offer your work as Closed Source, then they have to essentially reverse engineer every new thing you do. This expensive unlike simply giving your innovations away for free in OS development.
In short, running a business is much like fighting a war. You want to be able to win definitively and then exploit that, not consistantly scrape by fighting with attrition. You want the fight to be as lopsided as possible because it allows you to make the most profits and that is what business is all about.
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:1)
Unfortunately, while you and I know these are not true, he does, and there was no convincing him otherwise. As hard as it may be to admit, I'm guessing that most professional game developers share this opinion. One must consider that to be senior software engineer for a game development studio, one most likely is one hell of a badass Windows programmer. The average Windows programming guru probably doesn't know squat about Linux compared to the average Linux-using Slashdotter like you and I. Therefore, he will have several ill-concieved biases against Linux, and likely will have no desire to have anything to do with developing for Linux. Unfortunately, I'm guessing it will take a long time before we can expect the major game studios to recognize Linux as a viable source of income.
Terrence
http://www.umr.edu/~tcaton
Re:Programming nitwit. (question) (Score:1)
At least in the case where the apps fuckup in linux, I have the option of ssh'ing in and killing them.
Also, it's a case of 'you get what you pay for'.
I don't (need to) pay anything for Linux and it has all the functionality I need.
I have to pay for windows, and it's a substandard system (for my needs).
--
Linux users dont play games (Score:1)
I wonder how they managed to play Diablo 2, Alice, Broodwar, Sim under their wine....
Re:Sure, when it works. (Score:1)
Also, you're running on the unstable/testing package tree. You have to accept and expect the fact that things will break.
It's not called unstable or testing because they like to use big words!
--
Re: (Score:1)
If someone can get Red Alert 2 running right on a (Score:2)
Why don't businesses think like businesses? (Score:3)
If I were the president of a gaming firm (instead I'm the president of a free software producing company [sourceforge.net]), I would seperate the code from the content and cut some costs.
Game development costs are ridiculous for the returns of mediocre selling games. Either you make a smash game or you sink. Costs could be cut a heck of a lot if there was more code re-use in today's gaming industry. It seems every little game has its proprietary 3D rendering engine. That's great, but why not focus your efforts where it counts (the fun of the game!).
If there was a free, cross-platform, very fast (as in cpu cycles) rapid game development platform that emphasised modularity, anyone could build games on their spare time using world-class tools developed by thousands of enthusiasts all over the world! All that would be needed is a game production company to want to cut development costs by not wanting to pay for a rewrite of mountains of code.
If the game development environment was to be composed of many interworking (but independant) parts, the useless parts could be discarded when not needed (stopping game developer's fear of bloat :)
Making the environment easy to use would encourage new developers who are only interested in making games (instead of computer programming) to make more games! It would also increase pressure on game production co's to make better games!(nice graphics are a novelty, crappy storylines make for crappy gameplay and no fun)
This only leads to increased prosperity and everything your heart desires. Thank you.
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:2)
If you are open source then your competitors which are using your code must be, by definition and legal license, open source as well. Therefore they will have player mods just like you and the sum of their players will certainly be more than yours so your competitors as a whole will have more of an advantage with a grass roots player mod movement. Yeah, yeah, you've got the innovative reputation but your opponents are cheaper so players may go with helping out the cheaper server to get the best of both worlds in terms of cost and game play.
Anyway I still think a better choice for games design will always be closed source development with good server scripting abilities for possible player mods. Maybe release a small multiplayer server package capable of supporting a few individuals who want to roleplay. Small enough that you can't consider it an MMPORPG anymore so it won't cut into your market. You should be able to carve out a good two years of use without significant competition, during which time you can still be creating the next generation game instead of being trapped in a short-term constant upgrade path in order to maintain your customer base.
Anyway I think we have to agree to disagree because this discussion doesn't seem to be getting us anywhere. Thanks for the distraction from my dreary hum-drum existence. :)
Re:Games can be open-source (Score:2)
--
Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:4)
> 3.Linux users will have to get used to the idea of paying for software. If the games are ripped off left and right, then there will be no money for the people producing the games. And then there will be no games.
You are assuming that "success" is defined by how many units can be sold. What if we defined it by "being able to play lots of nifty games under Linux"? In that case, "Open Source" and "free" might be advantages rather than disadvantages.
Take Freeciv [freeciv.org] as an example. It's open source, and it's successful in the senses that it has lots of dedicated players and it is still getting attention from programmers even after 5 years "on the market". It has also started moving away from being just a clone toward being an innovator.
How many commercial games still get bug fixes and enhancements after 5 years? In the commercial world, bugs get fixed exactly when businessmen think the fixes will contribute to the bottom line, which is rare indeed. Indeed, a steady stream of bug fixes might be seen as a conflict of interest with getting people to buy the next shoddy product.
Also, your favorite genre is at the mercy of a handful of businessmen. What if you love FPSs, and they decide this year that FPSs are declassé, and move on to the next big thing? You're screwed. No new titles, no bugfixes for the old ones. It has happened before, and it will happen again. With OS games, it's not a risk at all, because it only takes a handful of volunteers to keep a game evolving.
OK, so I named Freeciv. Granted, that's not much. But remember, Linux still has a very small share of the desktop market, and even a smaller share of the gaming market. As those shares grow, mindshare will grow too, and you'll see more games of Freeciv quality popping up.
Remember too that the PC world had a thriving shareware market long before Linux was born. The itch and the will to scratch has always been there. What happens as more and more of the shareware author type become aware of Linux and the joys of OS programming?
My brother used to tinker with shareware games, but he was stuck with QBASIC because he didn't have money for development suites, and of course it takes years for one person to develop a nice game if he can only work on it a few hours a week. But suppose he installs Linux on his system? He suddenly has more development tools than he knows what to do with. And between OS licensing and the internet, he can suddenly round up a handful of like-minded comrades to help make his game become a reality.
I think we are headed for an OS revolution in gaming just as we are in desktops, and just as we have already experienced in servers and supercomputing clusters.
We may even experience a catastropic collapse of the game production sector. Game programmers already work deathmarches for low pay, with a low probability of producing a hit. Any substantial spread of OS gaming is going to put pressure on a system that is already ill. (Did I say already ill? Look at the release-day pricetag of games that are coming out now, and compare that to what they sold for five years ago.)
As for scratching the itch... I quit buying games altogether. I bought a few for Linux, but every time I play one I find myself asking "Why should I play this, and deal with the bugs and screwball features, when I could write my own game, or take Freeciv and tweak it to suit my own tastes?"
If only 1000 people develop the same attitude, OS games will start popping up everywhere. And the more that pop up, the more mindshare they attract.
No, I don't think the desire for open source and the unwillingness to pay for certain kinds of software is going to hurt the "success" of Linux gaming at all. No more than they hurt the success of OS operating systems. The same factors still apply.
--
Comment removed (Score:3)
Games can be open-source (Score:5)
You know what that means don't you? Subscription sales. You give away the source to the game client (hey maybe even the server), set up your world (this should take the most time - this is where you add value, besides the actual server hardware itself) and invite people to play your free client in your world for a trial month. If they like it, pay .. $8 a month for the service. Make sure the world isn't always static (I'm not talking Evercrack here, they've made an obscene amount of money on a pretty crappy service) so players have a reason to come back month after month, year after year, and voila, you have an open-source game that makes business sense.
You don't lose anything by giving away the source; any potential competitors have to flesh out their own world and put up their own server hardware and offer the support that you will provide (because you're not Blizzard, you don't just leave your customers in the lurch when the game breaks down). And some other company did this, and their game looked great, hey I'd play it. Variety is always good, and their code will get back into your codebase. If someone uses your engine to create a fantasy game service, and someone else uses it to create a space game service, they've nailed 2 different, minimally-competing niches.
--
Re:Closed vs Open Source (Score:2)
Well, moreso for games, because they're more ephemeral, single-purpose and short-lived than other kinds of software.
- - - - -
sdl (Score:2)
'nuff said
Linux Game box (Score:2)
It would be much easier to do networked games. It would be the ultimate universal gaming engine it could even have old Atari and Nintendo emulators. Toppling the greedhead console gaming industry.
Linux only platform game (Score:2)
Then they need to make all the popular games have a linux port AND put it on the windows version CD. People don't want to give up windows when their favorite games don't run on linux.
--
SDL is a great library (Score:2)
I'm actually not sure if I agree with your first assertion. We're not going to release the source to our gaming engine, but I think it probably wouldn't matter all that much if we did, because the important parts of what we're releasing is the data that runs the engine. If gamers wanted to modify the engine, it wouldn't give them access to the extra levels and game packs we're making. That's the meaty part of what we're selling, really, the creative part. The engine is just the playback routine for the data.
But we do expect to be paid, of course :)
Less Than 100 Paid Free Software Developers?!?!?! (Score:2)
How about some short lists of companies and projects, hmm?
Here's a list of projects where people are getting paid (not everyone, but in most cases the largest contributors):
Actually, I'm getting bored, so I'll end there and note that I probably didn't even get a hundredth of the companies and projects...
What are you people talking about (Score:2)
Not So Certain about "brighter in 2001"... (Score:2)
I shop at a number of different computer stores in the Portland, OR area. Of those, almost all of them have carried Linux games in the past.
Few of them still do.
Sales of Linux games has been sparse. Part of this is that most people who use Linux do not tend to shop at those outlets for Linux stuff. Some of the titles just sit on the shelf for months.
The biggest problem though seems to be with how chain stores order. You think Mac games are considered an afterthought... These people do not seem to know what Linux is or what is wanted.
Stores that you would expect to be able to keep Linux programs in stock are falling behind. The biggest example of this is Fry's in Wilsonville. They used to have a large selection of Linux games and programs. Now the Linux/BSD shelf is half stocked with Windows ME! The only current versions of Linux are Redhat 7.0 and SuSE 7.0. Slackware and Mandrake are gone. There are about two different games. Nothing seems to getting reordered at the Portland store for Linux. (Though they do for their California stores.)
The attitude I see when dealing with these places is "The Linux Hype is over, so we don't carry it any more.".
I guess you just have to keep hammering on your local stores if you want to be able to find Linux *anything* in the future.
Gaming Learning Curve (Score:2)
Games have always been on the cutting edge. It seems to be a tradition or something
That being said, there is always the problem of the average user. Let's face it, the bell curve of knowledge for computer users is probably biased to the low end of the curve.
The upshot is that the skills needed to setup and install a mildly sophisticated game even on a windows box is likely over the head of an average user.
Some people just don't get the idea of certain products. For example, I can recall someone calling up a tech support line asking for the cheat codes for Flight Simulator.
So now we want to move to the wonderful world of Linux, etc. I can see that there may be problems here until we get the average expertise of people up to speed.
Unfortunately, many people do not care to invest the time and effort needed.
This falls into the category of: "We do not have time to get gas. We are running late already"