Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
First Person Shooters (Games) Entertainment Games

Linux, OS X Ports For Star Wars: Battlefront? 21

Posted by timothy from the maybe-is-better-than-no dept.
Ant writes "LinuxGames has an interview that mentions Linux and Mac OS X ports for Star Wars: Battlefront game client. Wow." The answer here is carefully and ambiguously phrased, but at least Linux and Mac OS X ports are not ruled out.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux, OS X Ports For Star Wars: Battlefront? More

Linux, OS X Ports For Star Wars: Battlefront?

Comments Filter:

  • Don't get your hopes up... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 29, 2004 @02:39PM (#10103546)
    Coming from Lucasarts you can't even expect a Linux server, let alone client. I imagine there will be a Mac port that comes out 2 years from now.

  • Even if you do port it... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by aj50 ( 789101 ) on Sunday August 29, 2004 @02:50PM (#10103599)
    Will it run as well or be as well supported or will it be an inferior product as some ports have been?

  • Buy it ! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by noselasd ( 594905 ) on Sunday August 29, 2004 @05:25PM (#10104550)
    IF they eventually release a client for Linux MacOSX, I hope people
    will buy those, rather than pirate it. Anything else than Windows and the console market are really just a niche, so buying it can hopefully
    show that a port it worth it.

  • Re:Even if you do port it... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Monday August 30, 2004 @11:56AM (#10109250) Homepage Journal
    "How about an old copy of Win98SE instead? It would take up less system resources, be cheaper, and it's not going to have many stability issues if your're just using it to play games with instead of installing a bunch of other apps. It also doesn't have that whole registering problem that XP came out with. "One disc to install them all..."

    Ugh, no, that wouldn't be my first choice. The stability alone would be painful. XP's got some memeory management stuff that makes it far more stable than 98. It may take a little more resources, but it wouldn't take long for anybody to spot the difference. It doesn't take much to pollute 98's memory.

    The registerring problem with XP isn't such a BFD either. Though I do feel it's a valid complaint, I'll be honest, I haven't had a problem with it.

  • Re:Even if you do port it... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Minna Kirai ( 624281 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2004 @02:48AM (#10115658)
    It doesn't take much to pollute 98's memory.

    If you're dual-booting to run one single game, memory corruption is unlikely to be a real bother. (... "Windows98 makes an excellent gaming platform for 90 minutes at a time" ...)

    For some games, win98 can be quite a bit faster. Some of its graphics functions are faster, and of course it leaves more RAM free than XP. But, DirectX 9 probably won't install on it, and that's the real killer.

  • Re:Don't get your hopes up... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Freon115 ( 672518 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2004 @03:08AM (#10115748) Journal
    It's based on the Unreal engine, which has already been ported to Linux/Mac countless times.
    Unless they have altered the renderer a lot, there's not reason not to port it as well...

Slashdot Top Deals

1 + 1 = 3, for large values of 1.

Close