Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Loki Files For Chapter 11 Protection

Posted by timothy on Mon Aug 13, 2001 09:45 PM
from the hoping-this-is-a-false-alarm dept.
yamla writes: "Loki is dead!" and points to a Linux Review article which says the gaming company has filed for protection from creditors under bankruptcy laws. Yamla continues: "Read about it here. This is terrible news! I have paid for some of their games and they were always at least as good as the Windows versions. I hope Loki can pull out of bankruptcy and keep going but if not, it will be our loss." There is also a story at LinuxToday (pointed out by reader Beee) which draws from the Linux Review report. Meanwhile, the Loki site appears business-as-usual. Filing for bankruptcy protection is not the same as being "out of business," but it's uncomfortably close.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Loki Files For Chapter 11 Protection | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 708 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2
  • Some misunderstanding of Loki. by NNKK (Score:1) Friday August 17 2001, @03:04PM
  • Hmmm... (Score:5, Funny)

    by NonSequor (230139) on Tuesday August 14 2001, @02:48AM (#2110258) Journal
    It just occurred to me that they may just be filing Chapter 11 to get people to buy more games from them. Hell, it worked on me, I just bought two games from them.
  • Poor Linux Platform by transami (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:48AM
  • Time for IPO? by magi (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @04:21AM
  • Who's to blame? by timerider (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @02:30AM
  • Unite! Go buy a game! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by !Xabbu (1769) on Monday August 13 2001, @09:59PM (#2111693) Homepage
    I was going to buy my first Linux based game when Kohan came out. This frusterates me. I'm sure they will be around for this release, but UGH!

    Perhaps its time to change the business model. Maybe they should focus on becoming a service for game manufacturers that ports the games for a fee but doesn't sell them?

    Another thought would be to get away from the damn 1st person shooters. I'm sick of them. Its getting old. Perhaps they could get in with a windows gaming company before a game is released (wishful thinking..) and simultaneously release.

    Another thought would be to release bare bones versions with a CD only and a PDF of the manual for a lower price. Kohan is bloody expensive for me to buy in Canada (so I'm not going to purchase it from Loki). Maybe they should throw a wad of cash that they don't have into marketing with large chains. Up here Business Depot carries Linux of various flavours.. maybe they could get in there.

    What it comes down to is this is/will be a big kick to the crotch of linux gaming. :(

  • by Kiwi (5214) on Monday August 13 2001, @09:59PM (#2111697) Homepage Journal
    I have a number of Loki games that I have purchased, including Heroes of Might and Magic III (one of the few games I was willing to dual-boot to play) which I was delighted to see ported to Linux, and RailRoad Tycoon II.

    Loki has always done a wonderful job in porting games to Linux. While, of course, the actual games had to be proprietary, they made a number of contributions to the Linux community, including the SDK kit.

    I don't know how to say this politely, so I will sa it bluntly: The average game player is the ultimate addict of the consumer culture. They want someone else to hand them entertainment on a silver platter. I can see why many gamers do not have the willingness nor patience to learn how to use Linux as a desktop operating system.

    Which is a shame, because a lot of those same gamers become the corporate IT department, and end up responding to the word "Linux" with great hostility.

    Anyway, enough of my rant. I hope a miracle happens and Loki is able to pull out of this one. I will make sure to purchase every Loki game I can see at Fry's later on this week.

    - Sam

  • A reminder for us to look around "linuxWare" by F50 (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @03:24PM
  • Lets Save Loki!! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by stuce (81089) on Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:09AM (#2112636)

    Listen! Loki is only $400,000 in debt. That's not that much. "Will someone with deep pockets save Loki?" No. But we can! They may have gone chapter 11 but the web site is still taking sales.

    I don't know what their overhead is but let's assume they make $20 on each sale. That means they only need to sell 20,000 games to be back at ground zero. That's a small percentage of the slashdot population! I know many of us are starving college students and trolls but most of us are well-to-do IT people making real money!

    Why stick out necks out to save Loki? I'll tell you why. They have not only made games on linux a reality, but they have made the ability to have games on linux a reality. They made SDL one of the best media layers for any platform. They made OpenAL, the only cross architecture 3D sound library. They pushed the XFree and Mesa developers giving them the need and the user base to make OpenGL on Linux stop being "ok" and start to "kick ass". If it were not for Loki, there would be no Maya for Linux, there would be no glx in XFree86, there would be no SDL. If they go we will lose one of the biggest forces pushing the linux desktop's quality. All of you who remember what 3D, 2D and sound were like on Linux 4 years ago - you KNOW how far we have come, and we owe much of it to Loki.

    I know money is tight (it's always tight), but we have an opportunity to save one of the coolest Linux companies around. Like games? Buy some right now, while we still can. Don't like games? Make a 'donation' to Loki to say thanks for all their hard work. Poor? Get one of the older 'on sale' games. Company just IPO'ed? Get two of each and give them to your friends. There are SO many of us!! Sure, Linux companies are dropping like flys but none fill the niche that will be left empty once Loki is gone.

  • Linux image/ game retailers / communism by pfloydman (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @05:41AM
  • You have to actually BUY their product, you know! by r_newman (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @03:44AM
  • Go buy it, dont Pirate! by Martigan80 (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:25AM
  • Will slashdot ever learn? by dzawitz (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @08:22AM
  • Loki almost gone? by Oshuma.Shiroki (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @05:34AM
  • Loki and Games they ported. by hackus (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @07:03AM
  • I'm not dead yet by cobar (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:42PM
  • My Problem with Linux Games... by ravenmystic (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @02:09AM
  • Which game to buy? by mlgm (Score:1) Friday August 17 2001, @03:52PM
  • Is now a good or a bad time to buy from Loki? by goodmanj (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:28AM
  • Kohan by friday2k (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:03PM
  • Grrr by proxima (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:07PM
  • Somewhat disturbing by Mike Hicks (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:09PM
  • OpenAL !! by OzJuggler (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:14PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Geez... by Scoria (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:18PM
  • Linux is for Servers, silly Rabbit! by ToasterTester (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:21PM
  • Once I can get into the store site... by jfunk (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:26PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • not by British (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:26PM
    • Re:not by sheldon (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:22AM
  • Games are for consoles...or emulators? by Dr.Dubious DDQ (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @11:11AM
  • Dynamix taking Loki with them? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Cef (28324) on Tuesday August 14 2001, @11:13AM (#2118011)

    Think about it. Dynamix close their doors. Tribes2 is doing ok for Loki, but now without Dynamix about to pay guaranteed money for patches and upgrades, they don't have the money to stay with their current financial setup.

    I'm guessing this is what some of the companies that Loki have ported games for were obligated to, assuming here that the patches were GAME fixes and not PORTING fixes. I'd expect porting issues to be the responsibility of Loki, and game design changes to be the company that wrote it in the first places problem. I may be wrong, but it seems rather likely to me.

    Plus, there is no maintenance money for Quake3Arena now that ID Software have taken over the support for the Linux port themselves (happened a while back). This probably makes things a little hairy, and now that Dynamix have gone down the tubes, it sounds like they have just been pushed over the edge, and need a little security, hence the Chapter 11 reorganisation.

    Well, I'm off to buy more Linux games from Loki, because while they are still around, I'm still going to support them. And this time I'm buying them direct from Loki. None of these places in the middle that absorb some of the cost themselves. Every little bit helps.

    PS: Those that suggested cutting down on manuals and stuff, and putting PDF manuals on disk, well thats what they did with Tribes2. You get the CD in a plastic DVD-style case (the semi-decent ones), an 8 page (4 x A5 sheets of paper with double sided black and white print, stapled down the center) guide that tells you your Tribes2 Serial Number, the minimum system requirements, a quick "Getting started" install guide, how to register online with the Tribes2 system, tech support info, customer service info, a quick guide to the in-game voice menu keys, and a keyboard layout map of all the keys in the game. Everything else is in the PDF. I've yet to even open that PDF file though. *grin*

  • I bought Quake 3 by alsta (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @09:47PM
  • There is no justice in the world..... by chatak (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @09:51PM
  • Figures. by BubbaFett (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @09:51PM
    • Re:Figures. by Lemmy Caution (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @11:22AM
    • Re:Figures. by dSV3Hl (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @09:56PM
      • Re:Figures. by swright (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @09:22AM
      • Re:Figures. by Aazzkkimm (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @10:03AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Figures. by linuxpng (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @09:56PM
      • Re:Figures. by grammar nazi (Score:3) Monday August 13 2001, @11:16PM
        • Re:Figures. by civik (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @01:07PM
    • Hmmmmph. by Lancer (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:47PM
    • Re:Figures. by gumleef (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:33PM
    • Re:Figures. by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @08:40AM
  • Linux game market (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Amon Re (102766) on Monday August 13 2001, @09:51PM (#2118243)
    The linux game market is simply not big enough to support a company like this and when you put in the fact that they don't get the same release dates as windows versions and the high warez rate of there games...I am surprised they lasted this long.
    • `high warez rate'? by Nailer (Score:2) Friday August 17 2001, @06:54PM
    • Re:Linux game market by HeghmoH (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:18PM
      • Re:Linux game market by Carpathius (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @08:49AM
      • Re:Linux game market by aaabbbccc (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:41PM
      • Re:Linux game market (Score:5, Insightful)

        by IronChef (164482) on Monday August 13 2001, @11:45PM (#2133552) Homepage

        A lot of people on this board go on at length about how they won't use this app or that app because it isn't Free-as-in-whatever. There are people here who won't even *use* something released under the BSD license because of ideological reasons. It's not free enough, I guess.

        I wonder what kind of percentage of the Linux market these people (zealots?) are? Maybe there just aren't enough Linux users willing to buy games, period, to support a company like this.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Linux game market by SLi (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:48PM
        • Re:Linux game market by mimbleton (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @02:06AM
        • Re:Linux game market (Score:5, Insightful)

          by GauteL (29207) on Tuesday August 14 2001, @03:49AM (#2129950) Homepage
          I'm sorry... but games is one area where you should not be extremist about free software.
          Why?

          1. Most has short development cycle and almost no benefit from long-term improvement. (There are exceptions, like multi-player-games that people play for a long time)
          2. It is important to not release to much info, because too much information spoils the game for people. This goes against normal development-policies.
          3. The developers mostly cannot have the same fun playing the game as others (again, as in 1. there are exceptions), this makes participating for "scratching an itch" impossible.
          4. There are a huge amount of people involved that aren't normally in geek-communities; artists, story-developers, musicians, etc.
          5. Because of graphical issues like speed, a lot of info is often in the client, that the gamer shouldn't know about, and an open-source version may more easily allow for cheating. It shouldn't be like this, but because of technical obstacles, it is.

          This all means that you take away almost all the benefits of regular open-source software (more eyeballs, more developers) and add inn a few bad side effects (spoilers, cheating, sheer costs), and you still demand that all games should be free-as-in-speech?

          It just isn't possible to make a living by creating most types of open-source-games. Some may be possible, but your narrow-minded view, would destroy the market for most types of games, if most people thought like you.

          Think about the added benefits to the community by having a company like Loki porting even closed source games. They release all of their common libraries under free licenses, and they have helped the community in developing free gaming and multimedia APIs.

          The point is, without Loki (a closed-source company), the free software community would be worse off.
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:Linux game market by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:32AM
        • Re:Linux game market by SLi (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:25PM
        • Re:Linux game market by SLi (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @09:20AM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • They are not done yet by ddstreet (Score:3) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:26AM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Sad to see them go (Score:3, Informative)

    by xwred1 (207269) on Monday August 13 2001, @09:52PM (#2118245) Homepage
    Loki made great ports.

    Its sad to see them go out for doing such good work, damn this economic crunch!

    I myself own 10 Loki games and I've enjoyed each one.

    They said awhile ago that they had lots of capital secured for a situation like this, and they weren't going away soon

    I just hope they stick around and pull out of this bankruptcy, I'm really looking forward to Deus Ex. I put off playing the Windows version with expectations of the Linux port.

  • the critics cry by Cephas Keken (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @09:52PM
  • What a shot below the belt by xZAQx (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @09:52PM
  • Not a big surprise by hooded1 (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @09:53PM
    • Re:Not a big surprise by Anthony Boyd (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:45PM
    • Re:Not a big surprise by jbchatham (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:13PM
    • Re:Not a big surprise by Phexro (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:19PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Not a big surprise by antis0c (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @10:05PM
      • Re:Not a big surprise (Score:4, Interesting)

        by norton_I (64015) <hobbes@utrek.dhs.org> on Monday August 13 2001, @11:26PM (#2117707)
        That isn't true at all. There are many individuals, companies, manufacturers, schools, and foriegn governments to whom the low cost nature of free software is a huge incentive.

        I use Linux mostly for idealogical and technical reasons, but it certainly doesn't hurt that it saves me a few bucks I can spend on hardware.

        Given the cost for W2K server + client licenses, the cost makes a huge difference for companies running webserver farms. In many cases not as important as the technical issues, but important none the less.

        TiVo could have probably used WinCE, VxWorks, or QNX on the TiVo. But I am sure the $0/unit software licensing costs of Linux makes a huge difference to their bottom line.

        Schools, especially outside the US, are deploying Linux left and right, because especially on low cost hardware, the cost of windows is a big chunk of system price.

        So, yes, when we speak of free software, we mean freedom, but many people use Linux because that includes the freedom to copy it without paying licensing fees.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Not a big surprise by David Hume (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:13AM
      • Re:Not a big surprise by SLi (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:19AM
      • Re:Not a big surprise by No One (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @11:56AM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Not a big surprise by Dante Aliegri (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @10:10PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Pirates? (was Re:Not a big surprise) by Simon Brooke (Score:3) Tuesday August 14 2001, @08:12AM
    • Re:Not a big surprise (Score:5, Interesting)

      by stevens (84346) on Monday August 13 2001, @10:05PM (#2158201) Homepage
      Frankly, most people would rather have stuff free than have to pay for it.

      Frankly, I don't encounter this attitude in the OSS community near me. We buy linux distributions; we spend our spare time promoting products we like (and also fit our software philosophy); we buy endless numbers of books.

      Most of the linux-oriented people I hang with bought one or two titles from Loki. I personally have two. I am not aware of a huge warez scene for Loki titles. It's just that there are so very few of us compared to Windows gamers. This will change eventually.

      But I'm sick and tired of hearing that Open Source enthusiasts will just not pay for things. Sure, I won't pay for something [microsoft.com] when there's a better alternative [debian.org] available. But that's simply not the case with Loki's stuff. I think they earned every penny with their attention to detail in porting and packaging (not to mention the SDL library).

      [ Parent ]
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Did We See This Coming? by Carbonate (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @09:53PM
  • Small target group? (Score:5, Informative)

    by bdkearns (231532) <bdk@@@bdk...us> on Monday August 13 2001, @09:53PM (#2118257)
    In all of Loki's games that I've played, people complained because they wanted to switch from the Windows version to the Linux one. They did not understand that Loki had to pay for rights to port the game, and actually do work to port it. Loki's only real target buyers were people who already used Linux as their primary OS. Most of these target people probably:
    1. Were not used to shelling out money for games.
    2. Did not play games as a primary occupation.

    Before a company like Loki can succeed, I think that there needs to be:
    1. A larger Linux userbase.
    2. Simultaneous releases across platforms.
    3. An easier way for Windows users to switch to the Linux version, than trying to return their Windows version of the game and get their money back.
  • Loki should set up donation page by 2ms (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:48AM
  • Hey guys... by joshua_doesnt_know (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @06:59AM
  • Unsavable? by bdkearns (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:20PM
    • Re:Unsavable? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 13 2001, @11:18PM (#2117681)
      Sir:
      • You have quoted someone else without his permission (shame shame)
      • I hardly think that an employee who left seven months ago is in a position to judge who is still employed.
      I have it on solid authority (namely, personal experience) that the count is significantly higher (5 technical, 2 artistic, and at least 4 administrative).

      Shame on you for kicking a puppy only trying to serve the community while it's down.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Unsavable? by puppet10 (Score:3) Monday August 13 2001, @11:23PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Chapter 11 != Out of Business (Score:4, Informative)

    by antis0c (133550) on Monday August 13 2001, @10:15PM (#2119766)
    I'm glad the article noted that Chapter 11 does not mean you are going out of business. This is often confused. This merely means you are seeking protection from creditors to buy yourself time to re-organize and create a plan to pay back your debt, and become profitable.

    In todays market, it's very hard to find funding for a tech business. We can all thank Dotcoms for that with their VC Funded Businesses based on Phantom products.

    I personally think Loki will be able to pull through this. I just recently downloaded a bundle of Loki demos for Linux, very impressive. They all worked rather well and with little effort, the installer was a shell script with I think binaries encoded, haven't looked but it loaded a GTK based installer that automatically asked which demos I wanted, and downloaded them accordingly. I was very impressed. I hope their upper management has as much talent as their programmers. They'll surely pull through if this is the case. I think what would be a potentially successful model would be to create a Linux gaming "environment". Basically an environment that superceeds your normal distributions environment. Libraries, Programs, what ever required, then build all the games accordingly. This would help with a lot of cross-distribution incompatibilties and help promote gaming in Linux. Unfortunately Linux was not designed for gaming, and Linux does not own a large share of the desktop market (the market that plays the most games), so they face a very large challenge..
    • Re:Chapter 11 != Out of Business by brickbat (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:43PM
    • Re:Chapter 11 != Out of Business (Score:5, Informative)

      by xwred1 (207269) on Monday August 13 2001, @11:24PM (#2117700) Homepage
      Speak of the Devil, just caught this on Linuxgames:


      Loki Software President Scott Draeker sent in the following regarding the bankruptcy report:

      People should not confuse this with a Chapter 7 liquidation, where you close the doors and sell off the assets. That is not what we have done.

      We filed a Chapter 11 reorganization. This will allows us to deal with our creditors fairly and equitably and at the same time continue to operate the company. We are still shipping products and porting new games and expect to be doing so for a long, long time.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Chapter 11 != Out of Business by szcx (Score:3) Tuesday August 14 2001, @01:42AM
    • No, chapter 11 more or less means bye-bye by Ars-Fartsica (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @10:09AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Buy 'dem games! by vandan (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @07:35AM
  • why don't we... by Misha (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @09:29AM
  • Buy Out EBWorlds Stock. by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @01:53PM
  • why does Loki owe Activision? by bbh (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:31PM
  • Chp 11 versus OOB by rjamestaylor (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @11:06AM
  • ID Software's Fault by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:38PM
  • by standards (461431) on Monday August 13 2001, @10:09PM (#2128722)
    Of course, the pundits will say that there is no profit in the Linux game market, and therefore the Chapter 11.

    But wait! There is almost no profit in the PC game market PERIOD. It's is very difficult to make a profit in this business. Game development is an expensive proposition - especially when it comes to the advanced graphics and gameplay that we all expect today.

    Even high-quality Windoze-centric shops have gone away - just look at Looking Glass studios for one. Gone! And they didn't do ANY linux. And they had great games, and excellent sales. And they were liquidated just last year.

    The fact is that computer games like "Who wants to be a millionaire" sell bigger than all the rest, and they're cheap-as-dirt to create. Why spend $5 million for game development, when for $200,000 you can create a cheesey game that has 10x the number of sales???

    Strangely, these days, the home console market is the only place where sophisticated computer games have a fair chance of being profitable. The sales volumes are significantly greater than those sales for Linux... and Windows.
  • Fuck by jesser (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @01:37AM
  • Catch 22 leads to chapter 11 (Score:5, Informative)

    by Gen-GNU (36980) on Monday August 13 2001, @10:05PM (#2129520)
    Well, I can't say I am really surprised by this...
    I have personally only bought 2 games from loki. I bought quake 3 and railroad tycoon2 (one of the very first they did). In that time, I have probably bought 10 times that number of windows games.

    The catch 22 is that until all games come out for linux, and at the same time as windows, most people will keep dual booting. But until enough people run linux, (and buy games), but don't run windows, game companies won't have incentive to develop for linux, except as an afterthought.

    Since I have a windows partition, I usually get games I see on the shelves that look cool, or ones I have heard about from a friend. When I see a /. story about loki, I go to their site, and usually see a new game they have done, but I already own it for windows.

    I wish Loki the best. And I wish I could say something like &quot From now on, I am going to buy games from loki, if only to support gaming on Linux. &quot But in truth, I know that I will continue to buy the cool new games as soon as they come out, and unfortunately, that usually means I won't be buying from Loki.

  • This was bound to happen ... by Forager (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:30PM
  • I will simply stop buying games by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @09:12AM
  • Ya know why they're failing? by Pope Slackman (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:24PM
  • Holy fuck by MSBob (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @09:55PM
    • Re:Holy fuck by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @10:01PM
      • Re:Holy fuck by jorbettis (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:54PM
      • Re:Holy fuck by norton_I (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:35PM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Holy fuck by MAXOMENOS (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @01:36AM
      • Re:Holy fuck by mimbleton (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @02:17AM
        • Re:Holy fuck by MAXOMENOS (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:38PM
          • Re:Holy fuck by mimbleton (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:54PM
  • Chapter 11 does not equal dead by {tele}machus_*1 (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @07:57AM
  • I don't think it's going to be THAT bad... by PenguinX (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @05:25AM
  • Because of DRI. by luugi (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @09:47AM
  • We should launch a campaign to help. by TheLoneCabbage (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @09:45AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Loki should make Mac ports... by Rexifer (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:32PM
    • They should do both. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mcc (14761) <amcclure@purdue.edu> on Monday August 13 2001, @11:08PM (#2117648) Homepage
      Don't port to linux. Don't port to mac, either.

      Write a decent compatibility library, or tweak SDL for your own uses. Port to that. It would be a bit more work to try to cover up all the loose places where the compatibility library doesn't fit that os well, but you'd be able to simulteneously release for linux, mac, mac os x, and linuxppc, and maybe later on put together a SUPER HAPPY FISH BONUS PACK! with playstation2 versions of like four of the games you just ported to linux/mac.
      If you're going to bother with the herculean task of porting spaghetti code (which most games are) to a different operating system, take the extra time to work in a sane portability architecture. In doing so you'll probably at least double your possible target audience with not *that* much work.

      That being said, you probably could make more money off the mac users. Mac users probably aren't as heavy into gaming, true, but mac users are a captive audience. Unlike (((the majority of!))) linux users, mac users do'nt have the option of booting into windows. Now that bungie is dead, they have only what can be ported or emulated, and because there have been almost no new mac ports to speak of in nearly forever they are mostly starved for decent games and will probably run anything even mediocre that runs on their computers.

      What? Bitter because Loki seems to be gone, and dynamix seems to be gone, and i will probably never get that mac os x version of Tribes 2 [petitiononline.com] i've been wanting so badly? Who, me?
      [ Parent ]
  • Doh! by DeadPrez (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:44PM
  • Another Linux Lesson Learned by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:01PM
  • Like it or not, the retail chain is king... by olmuckyterrahawk (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @07:03AM
  • This highlights... by savrinor (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:07AM
  • Re:Loki Files For Chapter 11 Protection by goldedge (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:02AM
  • Amiga once too! by Swordfish (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:03AM
  • Gaming is about having the latest hardware. by 2ms (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:35AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • time to change my future by OO7david (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:03PM
  • don't worry by arielb (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:42AM
  • This market is as big as we make it ourselves! by Delgul (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @05:21AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Support? by SealBeater (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:57AM
  • Few/No Linux Games != Death of Linux by brocktune (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:38AM
  • so go BUY a game NOW by Yahnz (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @10:17PM
  • chapter 11, folks by mikeee (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @08:42AM
  • This SUCKS! by Mals (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:44PM
  • What ended it for Loki (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Natalie's Hot Grits (241348) on Monday August 13 2001, @11:38PM (#2141621) Homepage
    What ended it for Loki Games? Well, I happen to know one company I can slap the blame on. nVidia.

    Why nVidia? well, its simple. when the tnt2 debutes, nVidia releases a statement that they are the only 3d video chip maker that is fully supporting Linux with Open Source Drivers. They were to release register specifications, and release a working, open source driver developed by nVidia and helped upon by a bunch of other interesting people. What happened to this ideal? They took it back of course, just as soon as 3dfx died and opensourced all their IP. When nVidia saw the monopoly knocking at their front door, they immediately withdrew their plan (this one year later) and decided to go closed source. you couldnt even use a custom kernel with the nvidia driver because it was entirely closed source binary only.

    Too bad for Loki, who just spent the last 6 months porting Quake3 to Linux, now they just found out that the only video card they can officially support with Xfree4 is the Voodoo3 and Matrox g400 (dog slow in linux).

    Add this to the fact that Quake3 for Linux came out on the SHELVES about a month after the windows version, and then, more expensive (by then, the windows version had been reduced in price by retailers, and the linux version could be downloaded off the internet, there was so little market for the linux version, they had to sell them at full price)

    Imagine that, Quake3 launch more costly to consumers, and later than everyone else, not to mention that the only video card that could run quake3 at the time was a tnt2 and Geforce1 at reasonable speeds, and didn't even have alpha quality Xfree4 or kernel drivers(required to use 3d direct rendering in Linux)

    Of course, nVidia released their closed source with open source wrapper later on that year, by then, it was too late. EVERY gaming migrant from windows switched back to windows specifically because of their video card's support (NVidia).

    If you want a finger to point, point it at nVidia. they should be brought up on charges of anti-trust IMO.

    Fuck you nvidia, I have nothing else to say to you. bitch. You ruined the only gaming potential Linux has ever had. If it wasn't for your delayed closed shitty alpha quality driver, Loki would have made a killing on Linux quake3. insted, only the newbies who bought the voodoo3 could play quake3, and so, only 10% of the potential market actually bought it. You had the only card that could handle quake3, and you lied on your promise to be the "leading 3d video card maker on the Linux platform"

    Have a nice day.

  • Yet another Linux company bites the dust by SumDeusExMachina (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:08PM
  • The Game Market and the Killer App by Greyfox (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @08:17AM
  • Not *that* big of a deal by reflective recursion (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:45PM
  • A very likely reason for this... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by darthpenguin (206566) on Monday August 13 2001, @10:11PM (#2142232) Homepage
    Somehow, I think the main reason that Loki didn't do as well as they should have was the way their products were marketed. For example: Tribes 2 for windows can be found at any decent computer store, and at CompUSA and Fry's, it has been on sale almost constantly for $19.99. Tribes 2 for linux, on the other hand, can be found in no retail store that I've been to. The only option I have is to buy it online, for around $50 (plus S&H). Now which version would most people go for? The only reason that I didn't spend $20 on the windows version is because I don't run windows on any of my machines, but most people aren't in that situation. I think if it was possible to get some more games into stores (at more competitive prices!), they could have done much better. The one or two copies of quake III that each store has don't count ($50 apiece).
  • PC games market is in a pretty bad state anyway... by EnglishTim (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @05:06AM
  • A real shame by Ulwarth (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:37PM
  • My e-mail to Loki by madirish2600 (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:20PM
  • How to help by michaelsimms (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:56AM
  • We owe it all to Microsoft "standards" by DRO0 (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:55AM
  • Blame it on the RedHat users by Cyno (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @03:59PM
  • by efuseekay (138418) on Monday August 13 2001, @11:47PM (#2143636) Homepage
    Stop /.-ing the site for people who are there to buy them!

    *rant over*
  • Buy It. Don't Burn It. by noddyholder (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:27PM
  • This is partly their fault by verin (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @01:52AM
  • Almost happening to me by heroine (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @09:31AM
  • I'm not suprised by SocietyoftheFist (Score:1) Wednesday August 15 2001, @12:11AM
  • Ok, let's make their business profitable by Querty (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @04:12AM
  • Has Linux changed our gaming habits? by jfreak32 (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @06:46AM
  • If you want to port a game, write me. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ddt (14627) <ddt@davetaylor.name> on Tuesday August 14 2001, @02:21PM (#2145111) Homepage
    If you want to personally port a game to Linux, write me a letter (remove the _nospamplease), and I'll try to hook you up with the game author and source code. The catches are: a. I need a resume and convincing that you're not a flake, and b. you'll probably have to release it in binary form only.

    This is how Linux game ports work- one by one.
  • Is there anything we can do? by CptnKirk (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:29PM
  • Oh well... by Doc Fazulli (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:24PM
  • bound to fail, unfortunately by mj6798 (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:24PM
  • Playing Kohan right now. by motorsabbath (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:22PM
  • Paypal Account? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fdiv(1,0) (68151) on Monday August 13 2001, @10:49PM (#2146749)
    The linux community has rallied behind causes we felt were worth supporting in the past, however I cannot remember any instance in which the community has rallied behind a commercial venture before. Anyone interested in setting up a Paypal account for the purpose of helping out Loki? How much are linux games worth to you? Would you be willing to donate a few bucks to help keep Loki afloat? Consider what message this would send to Windows-only game developers...the linux community is not only wanting for games, but willing to support companies that will provide for them.
    Anyone with me?

    • Re:Paypal Account? by frleong (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:13AM
    • Re:Paypal Account? by paulm (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:59AM
    • Re:Paypal Account? by synsent (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:19PM
    • Re:Paypal Account? by Fizzlewhiff (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:59PM
    • Re:Paypal Account? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pbryan (83482) <email@pbryan.net> on Monday August 13 2001, @11:41PM (#2130906) Homepage
      I think it is important to address the questions you ask in as honest a manner as possible.

      The linux community has rallied behind causes we felt were worth supporting in the past, however cannot remember any instance in which the community has rallied behind a commercial venture before.

      Nor can I, and I think the reason is simple: the Linux community has not and probably will not rally behind commercial organizations. It's generally counter to the open-source, share-information culture inherent in the Linux community.

      Anyone interested in setting up a Paypal account for the purpose of helping out Loki?

      Maybe, but not me, and not a lot of Linux enthusiasts. I prefer to apply my time and financial resources toward a cause that better suits my needs in the end, and gaming is not it.

      Today, my strongest Linux interests are: stronger office suite offerings, stronger video editing offerings and Sorenson codec cloning/grafting/hacking -- whatever to get the damn support working under Linux.

      I believe such endeavours are more beneficial to the Linux community at large, and if I'm wrong, at least such endeavours better fulfill my needs of Linux, which is the whole point.

      Contribute where it matters to you most, worry about your own self interests, others will do the same, and if we share our results, we all win in big ways.

      Maybe games fill that role for more Linux enthusiasts than I think. I have been known to make mistakes ... (pause) ... from time to time.

      Would you be willing to donate a few bucks to help keep Loki afloat?

      I think you may be largely underestimating the problems that Loki faces. Maybe some donations will pull them out of their current financial crisis, but there's no indication that they would come up with a long term strategy that works both for the Linux community and fiscally.

      If a company cannot work at a financial level, the battle is already lost, it's just a matter of time. Nobody wants to sink money into a black hole, even if it feels like a good cause. If you don't think it will make a difference, then what's the point?

      Anyone with me?

      I'm sorry, but I think anyone who follows this proposition on its face is asking to waste money. I think it only wise to "chip into" projects that can demonstrate (or at least illustrate) an endgame that makes sense - namely: a company that can sustain itself and provide value to the Linux community.

      I like Loki. I like its games. I like the quality of its work. I like its contributions to the open source community. It did everything right, and I haven't bought a game. I probably would never have. It's cold. It's hard. It's probably flamebait. It's the truth.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Paypal Account? by ksheff (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @01:57AM
    • Re:Paypal Account? by Faux_Pseudo (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @01:54AM
    • Re:Paypal Account? by GiorgioG (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:39PM
    • Re:Paypal Account? by Bryce (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:53AM
    • Re:Paypal Account? by omnirealm (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:49PM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Warez-like release? (Score:5, Informative)

    by aralin (107264) on Monday August 13 2001, @10:16PM (#2146963)
    Well, if they would sell warez-like release of their games, just downloadable files and pdf manuals or even without manuals or with just a stripped version, they could charge half the cost since all the money would go to the company and wouldn't be lost in the supply chain. And it would be very good solution for these types who say that the cost is "just too high" so they better download it from warez. I guess this could be good marketing move, no?
  • Must buy RUNE! by Mandelbrute (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:17PM
  • Come on, Slashdot! by ChaoticCoyote (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @10:46PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Slim chances of recovery (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MSBob (307239) on Monday August 13 2001, @10:23PM (#2153695)
    Filing for bankruptcy protection is not the same as being "out of business," but it's uncomfortably close.

    It's not over until the fat lady sings, of course, but I think I hear her sucking air into her lungs and clearing her throat. That fat lady is going to sing soon and when she does she's going to blow some eardrums. There are very few companies that survive the chapter 11 stage. Stop deluding yourselves guys.

  • Lokigames & Nokia Media Terminal Deal by mightyflash (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @03:18AM
  • It's those pesky sales figures by Junks Jerzey (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @08:03AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Time to buy more games by rsd (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @07:49AM
  • Terrible news? by Syberghost (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @07:49AM
  • Loki's business model was flawed ... by dougmc (Score:2) Thursday August 16 2001, @02:56PM
  • The Linux market is big enough by theMAGE (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:00PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Hey, You there! Buy a stack of Lokigames just now! by Qbertino (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @06:21AM
  • I'm not surprised by giannifive (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:23PM
  • hehheheheh having fun yet? by GC (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @06:11PM
  • Order Now! by INAN (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @11:01PM
  • Holy crap I must be psychic... by defile (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @10:51PM
  • Nokia to the rescue!!!!!!!! by nugymmot (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:45PM
  • Wanna help Loki? by Virtex (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:41PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • I see some parallels . . . by Kreeblah (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @10:41PM
  • I'll buy more Loki games, no problem with that... by S1mon_Jester (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @06:38AM
  • There may be solutions by The Cat (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:53PM
  • I wish I could help. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by small_dick (127697) on Monday August 13 2001, @11:50PM (#2157071)
    Something is wrong is this world. Loki is a very good company, with very good people.

    A couple years ago Microsoft was buying up PC game companies left and right, where is the IBM promise of "billions of $$ on Linux" pledge now?
    Maybe someone should set up a pledgeboard, something like "I promise to buy $XXX of Loki Games or the SDL book" within two weeks".

    IF the SDL book comes out, I pledge to buy both it and the Tribes 2 for Linux, even though Dynamix is dead.

    It's not just Linux that's dying, it's not just the dot-coms, look at Japan, the lowest stock indexes in 17 years. The world economy is collapsing.

    Goddamn government, while they've dragged out the Microsoft trial for 15 years, they should have been doing the same thing with software that the post office does with their vehicle fleets..splitting up the dollars spent between vendors. The monopoly desktop would not even be an issue now.

    Linux is ready for the desktop. When people use it work, they will start using it at home, and more games will sell. RedHat, IBM and Apple (for example) would get a broader base of enhancement requests and the state of Linux/BSD/Apple would increase rapidly.
  • by RichiP (18379) on Tuesday August 14 2001, @01:05AM (#2157638) Homepage
    It's simply these game authors who charge exorbitant rates to allow Loki to port their games. The reason they're charging so much is that they're assuming the games are worth that much because of how much they make on Windoze.

    Linux users should rally behind Loki and petition game software authoring companies to charge a fee that's according to the Linux market. They have nothing to lose and much to gain if the Linux gaming industry grows.

    They never charged that much 5 to 7 years ago when the Windows market wasn't as big as it is today
  • Geez! Not going out of business! by praedor (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @08:00PM
  • I bought a whole pile of Loki games! by The_Dougster (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @08:39PM
  • licensing by metalhed77 (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:13PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:I dont feel guilty. by MSBob (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @10:05PM
  • Re:loki's games "great"? by uhmmmm (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @11:41PM
  • Re:Loki Is A Just A Mirror... by MoOsEb0y (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @02:03AM
  • Re:Damn, damn, damn, damn... by Goldberg's Pants (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @05:22AM
  • Re:Linux is a dying animal by Explo (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @01:51PM
  • Re:Why is it so imperative that we save Loki? by TheLoneCabbage (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @04:31PM
  • Re:Loki Is A Just A Mirror... by Flabdabb Hubbard (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @07:14AM
  • Re:What can I do? by praedor (Score:1) Tuesday August 14 2001, @11:51AM
  • Re:loki's games "great"? by treke (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @10:22PM
  • Re:fuck you too by ergo98 (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:18PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:I dont feel guilty. by Carbonate (Score:1) Monday August 13 2001, @10:00PM
    • Re:Open Source LOKI!!! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rhavyn (12490) on Tuesday August 14 2001, @12:28AM (#2121817)
      The libraries they wrote to port the games have been open source since day one. You know, little things like SDL and OpenAL. Yea, loki wrote them. And it'd be tough for them to release the source code to games when *they don't own the source.*

      Does anyone on slashdot actually know what the hell is going on anymore?
      [ Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:loki's games "great"? by Alex Belits (Score:2) Monday August 13 2001, @10:17PM
  • Good choices... by Svartalf (Score:2) Tuesday August 14 2001, @09:40PM
  • 62 replies beneath your current threshold.
(1) | 2