EVE Online's Linux/Mac Client Goes Live Tuesday

The official EVE Online site has details of upcoming patch 'Revelations 2.3'. Along with a number of bug-fixes to the PvP-focused Massively Multiplayer Online Game, this game fix will offer up compatibility with Mac OS X and Linux. Though the Mac client is a native port, Linux will require the used of Cedega. The post suggests that if you'd like a preview of what the game will be like on your rig, you can download the client and tool around the test server. System requirements are also listed, as are the distributions of Linux they are specifically supporting: Ubuntu 7+, Suse 10+, and Linspire 6. Update: 11/04 14:32 GMT by Z : Fixed implication of native Linux client.

So long GPA....

[lordofthechia (598872)]

Oh god... no...why? Crap, the only thing that has kept me from trying that game was the lack of a linux port. And Tuesday? Lets see 3 weeks before finals.... Well it's official, I'm switching to business.

Re:So long GPA....

[kcbanner (929309)]

Its not a linux port. They simply packaged Cedega with EVE. I wish people would stop praising them for that...its not a native client.

Re:

[Spit (23158)]

Honestly, what difference does it make to you whether a closed binary is compiled against Windows or Linux APIs? If the software runs well, there is no difference except in your head.

Re:So long GPA....

[cloricus (691063)]

Compare EVE Online under WINE (currently performs slightly better than Cedega at running eve) to Doom 3.

Oh you wanted more to this comment? Guess you honestly don't understand the difference between native and the limitations of compatibiliy layers. There is simply no comparison to a native supported application.

Re:

[Lonewolf666 (259450)]

The EVE client is slow even under Windows.

In the "Guristas Treasure Hold" in Friggi the older of my two PCs (P4 2.4 GHz, Radeon 9600 Pro, 1 GByte RAM) has significant lag. Entering the same complex with my newer PC shows better performance on a slower DSL line. So it is obviously not a network problem but a client side performance problem.

Any well programmed FPS game has better graphics performance ;-)

Re:

[WilliamSChips (793741)]

He said compatibility layer. Which means that when the programs try to call the Windows API they're actually calling the WINE API which then calls the relevant Linux functions. Which is slower than the API itself.

Re:

[Goaway (82658)]

Says the man with square HTML tags.

Re:

[cheater512 (783349)]

Its effectively the same yes but native Linux ports are usually somewhat faster than running the same game on the same rig under Windows.
Using Wine throws away the benefits of Linux's superior video and audio libraries due to overhead.
The gameplay is similar to using it on Windows ironically.

Re:

[cheater512 (783349)]

Yeah the difference isnt massive but Linux can add 5+ fps to a game.

Re:

[Bert64 (520050)]

I wonder if vista widens the gap...

Re:So long GPA....

[kripkenstein (913150)]

Its not a linux port. They simply packaged Cedega with EVE. I wish people would stop praising them for that...its not a native client.

Sure, a native port would be better, but this is still a step in the right direction. They deserve *some* praise for it.

If it lets a few more people not have to dual-boot into Windows to play games, then they are doing something right. Hopefully this will grow the non-Windows gaming market enough so that eventually native clients *are* released for Linux / Mac.

And as for Cedega not being truly open-sourced, and the games themselves certainly not, well, as a Linux desktop user and FOSS supporter this bothers me. But the fact is, at this point in time hardcore games are mostly a closed-source environment, whether on a console or a PC. Games are different than most typical desktop apps for various reasons. Hopefully in the future this will change, but meanwhile lots of Linux users want to play games, so this announcement is positive news.

Re:

[InvisiBill (706958)]

Cedega isn't open-source, but they contribute back to wine, which is.

CCP paid for significant work on Cedega (and so wine) for EVE to run.
They changed their own code to improve compatibility.
As a result, you can now run EVE on wine, if you don't want to use the Cedega packaged client.

No, Cedega doesn't generally contribute back to Wine. The two are basically completely separate projects now. http://www.winehq.org/?issue=329#Cedega%206.0%20&%20Wine%20Benchmarks [winehq.org]

Here's the facts you need to know about Wine & Cedega:

• Cedega's core is based off the original Wine tree and was forked in 2002. There are several core components that no longer share a similarity with Wine as it exists today.
• TransGaming has not actively contributed to Wine in about 5 years with the exception of a few patches (less than 5 a year.)

Re:So long GPA....

[Dwindlehop (62388)]

Correction: They simply packaged Cedega with EVE for no additional cost. You don't have to subscribe to Cedega in order to play Eve. That's the important distinction.

Re:

[cloricus (691063)]

This isn't a port, it is the windows client wrapped in transgamings cedega.

EVE Online has been working nicely under Cedega for around a year and a half now, under WINE for around a year, and under Crossover for around six months. Honestly if you really want to play this game under Linux or Mac you are spoilt for choice as this new Cedega wrapper and Crossover both offer seamless install and at least in Crossovers case almost seamless game play.

Hopefully this will help EVE Onlines large L

Wow!

[seebs (15766)]

WoW, really.

I know a lot of people who play WoW. All of us play it, across a mix of Windows and WINE and other systems, because one person we know had a Mac. We wanted to play together, so all of us went with WoW, even though some other games sounded interesting.

I hope the same thing happens for EVE, and they find a sales boost that goes beyond just the influx of Mac and Linux gamers.

(I won't be one of them; I have zero interest in PvP, or in playing a game which is built around real and lasting consequences for mistakes. I play a game like that about 14-18 hours a day already, and I want something different for my recreation.)

Re:Wow!

[dameron (307970)]

> I have zero interest in PvP, or in playing a game which is built around real and lasting consequences for mistakes.

WoW has "real" consequences for mistakes?

"Lasting", in a virtual world?

Bah.

I believe you're looking for an "activity". "Games" are for people ballsy enough to keep score.

Re:Wow!

[seebs (15766)]

No, WoW doesn't. EVE does. They keep bragging about how a minute's play can wipe out months of work. Not interesting to me. In WoW, I can lose an amount of money that will take me as much as an hour to earn back. No problem, I can cope.

Re:

[EotB (964562)]

I didn't think that the 'danger' aspect of the game would really appeal to me, but it gives you an amazing sense of consequence for your actions. I got bored with WoW and the repetitive PvE/BG grind where the worst that can happen is that you don't make progress (although arenas are a good start). In EVE, when they say you can lose a months worth of work in minutes, they mean it. Thats what makes the game unbelievably thrilling to play.

I can understand why that may be a little bit too risky to cope wi

Re:Wow!

[Antique Geekmeister (740220)]

If I wanted a minute's play to wipe out months of work, I'd just run my programs from a root account all the time. No need to take that kind of risk for fun.

"Months of work"

[Per Abrahamsen (1397)]

> They keep bragging about how a minute's play can wipe out months of work.

I would never get that far, I refuse to play any game for which playtime feels like work.

Re:

[e1618978 (598967)]

I just accidentally enchanted my boots with "+7 Agility" when I meant to use "+7 Stamina", wasting 90 gold in WoW. This would take me a week or so to earn back - so you just aren't trying hard enough to lose money in WoW.

Re:Wow!

[Sycraft-fu (314770)]

It won't, really. The Linux and Mac gaming markets aren't all that large, especially since in both cases the option always exists to boot to Windows if you really want to play games. EVE's small market share isn't due to its lack of cross platform, it is sue to its game design. They chose to make a very hardcore game. This really doesn't appeal to a lot of people since they find it to not be fun. As such, it is always going to be far more niche than World of Warcraft. One of the major reasons WoW was so much more popular than any other MMORPG before it is because Blizzard heavily took the attitude that a game isn't supposed to punish you for failure. It functioned more like a single player game, where failure means reloading a save and trying something again, rather than being set back a large distance.

So while I'm sure it will get a boost in sales (they wouldn't do it if they didn't think they'd make some money), it isn't likely to be that huge. The game simply appeals to a much more narrow group of people than WoW. WoW is one of those games that I'll recommend to anybody. I believe it is simple enough for anyone to learn to play, and anyone to find enjoyable. That is not true of many games, and EVE is certainly one it isn't true of. I'd only recommend that to people I know that are very intense gamers, and that can deal with the consequences for failure that game has.

Re:

[cloricus (691063)]

Interesting...I'm sure last time I looked Linux held around 5% of the desktop market, and Apple held a touch more. Oh and strangely enough Vista was sitting just under 5%. Guess those game makers developing for Vista must be out right mad in the head to go DX10 in a market that is saturated ... Or they could do dx9/opengl/sdl and develop for the 10% of the market that is completely untapped instead while still keeping the other 85% who use regular Windows as well.

Please think through what you say befor

Re:

[Loke the Dog (1054294)]

I'm sure last time I looked Linux held around 5% of the desktop market

Hah! Where did you see that? In the logs of slashdot?

Re:

[SL Baur (19540)]

The Linux and Mac gaming markets aren't all that large, especially since in both cases the option always exists to boot to Windows if you really want to play games.

I am so tired of this argument, especially when Microsoft Windows is justified by "Hey, you've got to have it to play games." WoW is a lot more fun with a Mac than Microsoft Windows XP and I hope the same is the case with EVE (though I won't play it, I'm no fan of PvP).

Go alternative platforms. Choice Is Good.

Re:

[doomy (7461)]

When World of Warcraft alpha was given out to some of us there was a very alpha Linux client included. I have no idea why they dropped support for Linux back then. But it's probably due to driver support that was lacking.

It uses Cedega on Linux

[kcbanner (929309)]

Its not a native client. It uses a stripped-down version of the commercial fork of the now-obsolete xwine (what with normal wine having most dx things now), Cedega. People have been running the eve online client under wine and cedega for years now, I can run it under wine and get better fps than windows in some cases :P.

Anyway, the point is that they didn't actually take the time to write a native client, its simply packaged with Cedega, so this isn't really anything to praise them for.
I just thought I'd mention that because they don't until it actually starts installing.

Re:It uses Cedega on Linux

[QuantumG (50515)]

If more games companies (*cough* Blizzard) would test their stuff with WINE and support it, we'd have a different PC industry.

Re:

[QuantumG (50515)]

It's a completely different proposition to ask a company to add another platform to their test set than it is to ask them to make a brand new build with a brand new part of the code tree just to support a minor platform. They already have to test WinXP and Vista (and maybe Win9x and WinME if they wanna support those south american markets), asking them to add WINE isn't that much of an ask.

Re:

[timmarhy (659436)]

you fail to understand that the problem isn't blizzard, it's directX, which currently doesn't 100% work under wine http://www.winehq.org/site/status_directx [winehq.org]

it's insane to expect blizzard to start supporting it's game on such an unpolished platform.

Also, MS provide very good tools for migrating your applications from XP to Vista. Can you say the same about Wine?

I have no doubt blizzard have looked at the numbers and found supporting a linux version to be unprofitable.

Re:

[Moridineas (213502)]

Blizzard has simultaneously released Starcraft, Warcraft3, and WoW for Mac and PC--on the same CDs even. They have excellent mac ports--if you can even call it a port.

Clearly it's not DirectX holding them back...

I do however agree with you that for Blizzard a linux version is highly unlikely to be profitable--especially considering the number of linux-ONLY people who would buy WoW. Most linux people who are gamers are going to have a windows box / boot to play games on already.

Re:

[Moridineas (213502)]

Wow, I didn't mean to upset you, it's really not worth getting mad over this, especially when we mostly agree!

The point--that you've apparently completely and utterly missed, or misunderstood--is that WoW runs on OpenGL, and without DirectX, on the Mac! There's already a complete, well-supported and well-running version that runs without DirectX. Furthermore, you can even run WoW on windows without Direct3D, using the openGL rendering engine. if you can run it OpenGL on windows, you can do it on linux with

Re:

[kcbanner (929309)]

Your wrong. I can play WoW under wine just fine, getting better FPS than in windows. WoW has an OpenGL option, next time don't start yelling before actually reading things.

Re:

[Ash-Fox (726320)]

it's directX, which currently doesn't 100% work under wine

Majority of DX9 is supported. DX8 is supported, DX7 is supported and so on.

Also, MS provide very good tools for migrating your applications from XP to Vista.

I disagree. I saw nothing in their tools that let me just migrate my applications.

Can you say the same about Wine?

In the scenario of seeing nothing in Microsoft's tools to migrate applications? Yes.

I have no doubt blizzard have looked at the numbers and found supporting a linux version to be unpr

Re:

[lordofthechia (598872)]

But nothing beats a native client.

And I agree, believe me, I agree, but it's a step. When people can pick up game boxes at their local retailer and see under supported systems "Windows, Mac Os X, and Linux" it will help establish Linux as a credible alternative for gamers. The more people see "runs on linux" or "works well with linux" the more people will be willing to try this Linux thing.

Once we get big enough, then yeah, we'll probably get native clients (or more, lets not forget the Id games), but until then, I'm happy with these ste

Re:

[Ash-Fox (726320)]

WINE is an unstable target (in terms of development, not performance)

Which is why Crossover is stable. I'll also add that any enhancements they make are free to go back into Wine. Eve Online was already supported under Crossover.

Re:

[Bert64 (520050)]

And why would anyone bother writing native linux programs?
You'd end up with everything running through wine, which is hardly ideal... Wine programs stick out like a sore thumb alongside other apps on linux/mac. Wine will always be one step behind microsoft's implementation too.
What we need, is a clean stable cross platform binary specification and api set, especially now that pretty much everything is x86 compatible. Think of it as java, but using native code.

EVE vs Vendetta

[x1n933k (966581)]

I can't speak for EVE since I am a Mac user and never played the game however the idea, game play and such seem an awfully like Vendetta Online who natively support Windows, Linux (64Bit too), and Mac and looks great. Not to mention a great backstory.

It is also quite cheap compared to other online games. Can anyone vouch for EVE being any better than Vendetta? Although I quit playing VO it was one of the few MMOs that still support PPC.

Cheers,
[J]

Re:

[drspliff (652992)]

Vendetta is a poor and shallow game compared to EVE, one of my flatmates was an EVE Online addict (and quite successful EVE hacker)

If it doesn't have a monthly fee

[Sycraft-fu (314770)]

It probably isn't a real great MMORPG. You can look at this from many different ways: Maybe the great ones charge because they can, maybe charging allows them to maintain the infrastructure and manpower needed to run it, whatever. Point is that you generally find that the no monthly fee games aren't the great ones. A lot of the time it's a situation like Diablo 2. Where there's a lot of multiplayer, but it is little isolated worlds sort of, not the real massive worlds that everyone is in that you get from g

Re:

[gverdouw (879991)]

If there is one word that sums up Vendetta Online nicely it would be barren. EVE is not barren.

One of the only MMOs worth playing.

[by Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't change the rules to cater to the lowest common denominator, unlike WoW and other MMOs - it follows a specific vision, and users can either adapt or leave.

The openness and freedom of an old-school PK MUD combined with the concept of Elite/TradeWars/etc. make for an amazing, engrossing game.

Given its quality and lack of compromise, I'm surprised it's managed to survive so long.

I tried it

[satoshi1 (794000)]

I installed the "Linux version" (just a .deb that installs a shortcut that then downloads a stripped Cedega engine and the game data), but it will not run for me. It displays the splash screen... and that's it. I got the same results when trying to run Eve under plain ol' Wine a yeear or two ago. Lame. The game is so beautiful, too.

Am I mistaken? Mac "port" doesn't appear "native"

[analog_line (465182)]

I thought Cider was basically Cedega-for-Macs? No actual code was ported, they just created a DirectX compatibility layer for Mac.

Or am I wrong here? I'd love to think so, but I'm not sure.

Re:

[Darko8472 (966542)]

Need I mention that WoW (and any number of Blizzard games) are already fully Mac compatible? Not Linux, admittedly... but it's a step in the right direction that's been going on for years.

Re:Hopefully

[LingNoi (1066278)]

Because depending on wine makes you look like you don't care about your market and your relying on a third party such as winehq to make your game work.

If Eve brings out a patch that no longer makes it work under wine and 100 people send in hate mail then you can see why maybe a native client might be a good thing.

Re:

[Nossie (753694)]

"Blizzard wrote a Windows client for WoW that is ported to Linux with Wine for free"

So you didnt know that WoW was written on linux and working in beta before they moved it to windows then?

Re:

[kcbanner (929309)]

First of all, nothing is better than a native port. I don't care if it runs "fine" under wine. Maybe the shaders don't work, maybe there are graphical glitches. I want games companies to care enough to compile the damn thing for linux. All they have to do is just lose the dependency for silly windows libs, use OpenGL, its 10x better than directx in my opinion.

Re:

[Bert64 (520050)]

What's really needed is a cross platform binary standard and standard set of APIs...
If you could download one binary, and run it on any OS with an x86 compatible CPU. Like java, but using native code etc.
It would also make a lot of sense for games companies, write the game once and get windows/mac/linux/solaris/bsd ports for free, since your coding to the cross platform standard instead of any particular OS.

Re:

[JohnBailey (1092697)]

Why would companies spend resources on a Linux version of their software if their software works with Wine just fine? Blizzard wrote a Windows client for WoW that is ported to Linux with Wine for free. What more can a company want than someone else doing the work for them for free? Any company that spends vast amounts of resources to port a product to Linux when it can be emulated with wine just fine probably isn't making good business decisions anyway, and won't stay in business long. On the flip side, Wine could very well be hindering games from being 'Linux native' because wine is capable of providing the performance needed to get the job done. There is no incentive to provide such software for Linux users because they can use Wine.

Because Wine doesn't always work consistently. An upgrade can break some apps that were running well with wine, and a native client is going to work better. Games are also much more likely to do something low level that hasn't been thought of which could cause problems with Wine.

There doesn't need to be vast resources devoted to porting a game from one platform to the other. They don't have to write the whole thing from scratch..

The majority of the work is already done, and if the system is well designed,