Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
PC Games (Games) Software Entertainment Games Linux

Transgaming Releases WineX 3.2 65

Posted by simoniker
from the war-payne-world dept.
Beolach writes "Transgaming today released WineX 3.2, their subscription-download tool which 'brings the hottest Windows titles to devoted Linux gamers', now including support for Max Payne 2: The Fall of Max Payne, Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne and Homeworld 2, among others. The release announcement also quotes Markus Maki, Development Director of Remedy Entertainment as saying: "TransGaming's unique ability to enable Max Payne 2 to run on Linux without any access to the source code is quite impressive. We're extremely pleased that TransGaming is broadening our reach to new audiences and that the Linux community continues to enjoy our products thanks to TransGaming's outstanding work." In other words, this is all Linux gets for Max Payne 2."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Transgaming Releases WineX 3.2

Comments Filter:
  • translation... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by shweazel (583363) on Tuesday November 18, 2003 @10:04PM (#7507659)
    "TransGaming's unique ability to enable Max Payne 2 to run on Linux without any access to the source code is quite impressive. We're extremely pleased that TransGaming is broadening our reach to new audiences and that the Linux community continues to enjoy our products thanks to TransGaming's outstanding work."

    Translation:
    "Holy shit they ported our game for free!"

    Seriously though, why are gamers stuck funding these ports?
    Instead of gamers paying transgaming, and then deciding which games are ported, why arent the developers/publishers paying transgaming to get their game onto the "supported" list? This could be a lot cheaper than a full-fledged port.
    • Re:translation... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MMaestro (585010) on Tuesday November 18, 2003 @10:56PM (#7507909)
      Because developers don't want to fund something that does not guarantee a financial success. A developer can make the greatest game of the decade, but they're not going to pay a $250,000 in time and resources porting the game into Linux in return for a $100,000. They are in the business to make MONEY, not "to be different" and support Linux because they don't like Windows for X reason.

      Until the Linux MARKET, not community, succeeds in proving itself to be a market to be recognized, Linux is just like the early Mac gaming market. Overlooked, because so few people used it.

      • Re:translation... (Score:2, Insightful)

        by shweazel (583363)
        A developer can make the greatest game of the decade, but they're not going to pay a $250,000 in time and resources porting the game into Linux in return for a $100,000.

        You're missing the point. It costs transgaming much, much less than $250,000 to get a game working well under winex, because they're not starting from scratch every time.

        Most new games already "sort of" work under winex, even if they're not on the supported list, so all transgaming has to do is fix whatever bugs exist. Much cheaper than
        • No, you're missing the point. (Notice how rude it is to start a post by telling the parent is missing the point?) The exact numbers don't matter at all. Sure, it costs less than $250,000 to get a game supported. Would the charge to the company be less than this? Probably. But does that matter? No, and here's why - the cost of getting the game on the supported list is obviously greater than the return, otherwise companies would be doing this. You notice how game support for Linux isn't exactly universal? Tha
          • Re:translation... (Score:2, Insightful)

            by shweazel (583363)
            Notice how rude it is to start a post by telling the parent is missing the point?

            No, YOU'RE missing the point. (Yeah OK I probably should have left that part out.)

            All I'm saying is, maybe instead of releasing half-assed linux ports a year after the game comes out (I'm looking at you Neverwinter Nights), maybe it'd be easier to throw a couple bucks to transgaming. Sure it's not always as good as a native port, but it'd be out faster, and it'd be cheaper. But you don't seem to get it. (Notice how rude it
            • Re:translation... (Score:4, Insightful)

              by Mike Hawk (687615) on Wednesday November 19, 2003 @12:44AM (#7508484) Journal
              Acidic is right, and I really hate agreeing with that guy. You think they havent thought of every possible way to make money off of a game? If it was profitable, they would do it. That is the point and the only point. Most developers dont release a half-assed port, they don't release one at all. (What did someone say once? Developers, developers, developers, developers, etc.)

              And you both have forgotten something that would happen uniquely if they made winex officially "supported". Who would handle the CS calls when it doesnt work? IE more money out of the developer's/publisher's pocket when it might be transgaming's fault.

              Nope, winex is staying unofficial for lots of good reasons.
              • by Directrix1 (157787) on Wednesday November 19, 2003 @03:22AM (#7509086)
                All I have to say is: I'm glad I switched away from Microsoft to avoid the Microsoft tax of $100 every 2 years, so I can now pay the Transgaming tax of $5 per month * 12 months/year * 2 years = $120.... doh!
                • Also, doesn't anybody else wonder why these game companies aren't just using SDL, OpenGL, and MinGW environment. There would be almost nothing to port.
                  • couldnt be for the effects of DX9 and the fact that they dont _need_ to care about porting because Windows has 95% of the dektop market and theres almost never enough demand for a game on anotherplatform (Mac or Linux etc) that its worth their time and money (and later, support) to port a game that will sell fewer copies worldwide than they sell in the first few days?

                    no, i don't wonder. i wish that dx wasnt the necessity it is...but thats only because i dislike Microsoft (as is standard here) and would pr

                    • They would barely need to care about porting with SDL, MinGW, and OpenGL either. Also, iD really drives the quality of OpenGL. OpenGL 2.0 support is in Doom3. Expect widespread OpenGL 2.0 support very soon in windows (although OpenGL 1.4 with Shading Language, is about as powerful).
                  • They aren't using SDL because it doesn't offer anywhere near enough features - it is at best a bare-bones framework that needs a lot of additional work to be really usable. OpenGL is rather more low-level than Direct3D and, even if you can avoid problems with vendor-specfic extensions (which you can't), you then hit the problem that Windows OpenGL implementations tend to suck, seriously suck, because everyone on Windows concentrates on writing Direct3D drivers rather than well-written OpenGL implementations
                    • What more does a game need from that layer (SDL/DirectDraw layer), besides Framebuffer access? Also, I always thought OpenGL is a bit higher level than Direct3D since Direct3D quit promoting Retained mode operation for Immediate mode (unless they have done a reversal on this, I haven't checked the API docs since 7). And as far as the expense goes, you can just download a copy of Dev-C++ (MinGW C++ IDE) and SDL. And develop nice cross-platform capable apps.
                    • DirectX is a lot more than Direct3D and DirectDraw. Sure, SDl provides input handling, but not at the level of DirectInput, it doesn't provide anything even close to DirectSound (yes, there's OpenAL, but that's another dependency, and the Linux branch is pretty much stalled) and even DirectDraw is more than just framebuffer access. There's video codec handling and graphics loading in there.

                      And you're confusing cost of software with cost of development. Sure, you can go out and dowload DevC++, SDL, openAL..
      • Well, at least they could contribute a little bit ! Are they so greedy to not technically help TransGaming a little bit and maybe give ~1000 $ ? It's not like Linux market is THAT small after all ...
  • Great quote (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jvmatthe (116058) on Tuesday November 18, 2003 @10:07PM (#7507678) Homepage
    Sorry, but this just leaves me breathless:
    "Our groundbreaking portability development continues to keep pace with the industry's recent and most challenging games written for Windows," remarks Peter Hunnisett, Manager of TransGaming's Linux Development Team. "Dynamic sound, rich graphics and riveting game play are matched
    and, in some instances, surpassed with our WineX technology." [my emphasis added]
    I take that to mean that the Windows game plays better under Linux using WineX than it does under Windows. I know people will say things like "no BSOD!" to be funny, but doesn't this strike anyone else as a lot of malarkey? What runs better...Mine Sweeper?

    Ok, flame on!

    • While I have seen instances of Windows applications running faster under Wine (I havent touched WineX) than Windows, I believe they're probably just tooting their own "0mg l33t" horn.
    • i could understand maybe an opengl game running VERY slightly faster if the conditions were just right, just because linux has better memory management and is better in general. its possible, but very improbable.
    • Re:Great quote (Score:5, Informative)

      by Beolach (518512) <beolach@NoSPam.juno.com> on Tuesday November 18, 2003 @11:54PM (#7508270) Homepage Journal
      A game I play fairly often performs better under WineX than under M$ Windows. You may have heard of it: WarCraft III.

      Under Linux/WineX I run it at 1280x1024, under Windows I can't stand the performance at any resolution higher than 1024x768.
      • Huh... I've had exactly the opposite experience. I don't play games very often, but every once in a while, I like to play a game of Total Annihilation [cavedog.com]. It works fairly well off my older CVS version of WineX (before Gentoo took it out of portage). It doesn't work in regular wine (a null pointer deference relating to sound). However, it does take all 2.4 GHz on my main computer. And it's still a little jumpy at times. Keep in mind that this is a game that plays just fine on my 350MHz Windows 2000 machin
      • I agreed I also play Warcraft III under winex 3.1 and get better performance then I do under windows. Max Payne is * almost * just as good but not quite. But some games ( 1942,Baldurs Gate ) are considerably slower.
    • Re:Great quote (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Aliencow (653119)
      When RTCW was released about a year ago (I think) , there was no Linux single player version at all... I had a dual boot, and under Windows with my crappy Geforce 2MX the framerate would go between 30 and 70 all the time, with slowdowns when there was a lot of action... under WineX it ran at a steady 50FPS..

      I heard starcraft also runs faster in Wine but any computer faster than 200mhz probably won't notice :)
    • Actually, I've had an even better experience.

      On my desktop machine (AthlonXP2000+,GF4Ti), the original Homeworld simply refuses to run properly under WinXP, or even 98. It'll start up, get to the main menu, and just freeze up.

      Switch to linux, start it up in winex, voila! Runs like a dream, cranks all the way out to 1600x1200x32, and even gets along nicely with the Dual-head setup.

      YMMV
    • I play Ultima Online alot. And while, you might recognise that the 2d client of UO may not push any envelopes when it comes to graphics, it DOES play alot better on linux with wineX than it does on Windows.

      Not strictly in a graphical, look and feel sort of way either. I experience SIGNIFICANTLY less lag playing this way than I did on Windows. In crowded areas, where there are alot of people gathered in one spot, UO on windows will stutter, start and stop movement. On linux, funnily enough, this is nearly
    • Oddly enough a graphical 2D text adventure game I wrote back in the day is actually running better in WineX than WindowsXP. In XP some sound problems have sprung up which I can't fix thanks to a closed source wrapper. Works fine with WineX though.
  • right before release? I know they make CVS available free, or used to...surely someone's got it frozen @ 3.2.
  • My 3 month subscription ($5/mo) just ended, and I think I'm going to renew it. Paying a small amount of money to fuel the research for a DirectX compatability layer for Linux is cool with me. I want to get away from Windows.
    • by Mike Hawk (687615)
      Wait wait wait. Let me get this straight. People pay $60 per year to get Windows games to work under linux?

      One can purchase a completely legit copy of Windows 98 (mine has served me well over the last 4 odd years) for less than that. Turns out, Windows games run natively under Windows AND they work on day 0, not when some third party decides to make them work. Rad indeed! Logical...not so much.
      • 1) You can use cvs to build winex for free (I have).
        2) Windows 98 sucks. Something fierce.
        3) Windows 98 doesn't fully support my hardware (think dual processors)
        4) You can buy a months subscription and discontinue it if the games you want to play already work and you don't feel like building cvs. 5) Precisely what's wrong with this business plan again?
        • I'll enterain you're poorly thought out points...

          1) My point wasnt that it is free, but that someone would pay for it.
          2) Good point? Very well thought out, I'm totally convinced. What are you 11?
          3) Not my problem. You can use whatever inefficient setup you want, but the games dont support it anyway.
          4) How very selfish of you. Redundant with point 1.
          5) What business plan? Are they running a business? I think they could have fooled most of us if they think they are.
          • How arrogant. I'll entertain your kneejerk reactions.

            1) Well, it seemed like you were saying "why would anyone pay for this?" I was simply saying that you don't have to (you do miss out on copy protection code).
            2) I don't feel the need to explain why the Windows 95 line of operating systems sucks. Even most Windows apologists I know agree on this. I really don't care if you think I haven't "proven" anything. I'm not here to argue the technical flaws of Windows 98 (of which there are many). Anyways, i
      • by Spoing (152917)
        Wait wait wait. Let me get this straight. People pay $60 per year to get Windows games to work under linux?

        Yes, though it's $5/month, so if you want to pay for part of a year WineX won't all the sudden stop working. You just don't get updates forever for $0.

        One can purchase a completely legit copy of Windows 98 (mine has served me well over the last 4 odd years) for less than that. Turns out, Windows games run natively under Windows AND they work on day 0, not when some third party decides to make the

        • I'm taking to mean that you would dual-boot to play CivIII. Well if you have spent thousands of dollars over the years, why not put some of the spare parts together and make a windows only box? Seems like the most logical move. It doesn't even need to be connected to the internet to play CivIII. Winex just doesnt make sense.
            1. I'm taking to mean that you would dual-boot to play CivIII.

            No, it's just a game. I'd just play another if that one wasn't available.

            1. Well if you have spent thousands of dollars over the years, why not put some of the spare parts together and make a windows only box? Seems like the most logical move. It doesn't even need to be connected to the internet to play CivIII. Winex just doesnt make sense.

            I have a half dozen working machines and a barrels worth of parts -- what self-respecing geek doesn't

  • by Screaming Lunatic (526975) on Wednesday November 19, 2003 @12:50AM (#7508513) Homepage
    We're extremely pleased that TransGaming is broadening our reach to new audiences and that the Linux community continues to enjoy our products thanks to TransGaming's outstanding work.

    Remedy should put their money where their mouth is if they are so pleased.

    They should license WineX, throw it on a CD with Max Payne 2 and shrink wrap it. It should be sold at the same price as the Windows version. It's the least they could do for a company that is "broadening their reach to new audiences". In other words, helping Remedy sell more units.

    • They should license WineX, throw it on a CD with Max Payne 2 and shrink wrap it. It should be sold at the same price as the Windows version.

      While I'd love to see it happen, it won't. It would save the company the cost of development of a Linux version, but they would then be on the hook for support of Max Payne 2 running under Winex3 and Linux, which may very well erase any profits they would get from having it there in the first place. They could put a disclaimer ("here's Winex3, you can use it if you'

      • Well why not add a disclaimer to the EULA or the manual:


        "WineX is a third party product. It comes with no support or warranty use at your own risk.. blah blah blah.

        Heck provide a forum maintained by the WineX people for issues workarounds etc. It would cost them very little money and it's not like the Linux community is not used to getting their support from forums, IRC and other "unofficial" channels.
      • They could offer a LiveCD version that was tested across common hardware (Nvidia,ATI,Creative). And not offer any tech support on top of that.

        And it's not like Linux users would call tech support even if it was available. They would check forums, newsgroups, irc, etc. I don't call my ISP when I can ping their server but can't get my email working. I RTFMs and try to figure it out.

        So support would not be that big of a deal.

    • emedy should put their money where their mouth is if they are so pleased.

      They should license WineX, throw it on a CD with Max Payne 2 and shrink wrap it. It should be sold at the same price as the Windows version. It's the least they could do for a company that is "broadening their reach to new audiences". In other words, helping Remedy sell more units.


      If Remedy wanted support for Max Payne 2 on Linux then they should just pay Transgaming to support May Payne 2. It only cost Disney $15,000 to get Codewe
  • Yes, but.. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by tananda (85834)
    They still have yet to get any of The Sims expansion packs to work, after making such a big deal out of providing The Sims for the Mandrake Gaming Edition. Furthermore, The Sims Online seems to have been completely forgotten by the project as a whole.
  • For a 5$ a month service, WineX supports very few games fully. A new release after some six months and .. three new games?

    This just isn't very impressive.

    At least you can effectively buy WineX for a small fee and skip out on the upgrades.

FORTUNE'S FUN FACTS TO KNOW AND TELL: #44 Zebras are colored with dark stripes on a light background.

Working...