Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
PC Games (Games) Entertainment Games

More Bioware For Linux? 287

GNious writes "Bioware has a thread about porting the upcoming game Dragon Age to Apple Mac OS X and/or Linux. Debate include such topics as porting houses, physics engines and the value of the market, with an enormous amount of requests for such games as Neverwinter Nights 2. With the potential for selling upwards of 1000 copies (counting individual requests) of a game at possibly $50 each, is the decision to exclude a platform and the associated revenue the correct one, or are the petitioners the ones that have gotten it wrong to think that their ca 1-5% marketshare matters?" I think the unfortunante reality is that in today's gaming market, you find that fewer people are willing to take a chance on the sales for these smaller markets -- too hard to predict revenue, and too hard to (some would say) to do the porting.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

More Bioware For Linux?

Comments Filter:
  • Re:porting (Score:3, Informative)

    by MatrixCubed ( 583402 ) on Monday November 27, 2006 @10:44AM (#17001132) Homepage
    My own game engine (http://odyssey-project.com/) uses the following technologies:
    Graphics: OpenGL
    Sound: OpenAL
    Physics: custom
    Input: SDL
    Network: ENet

    The source compiles out-of-the-box on Windows and Linux.
  • Re:do the math (Score:5, Informative)

    by GooberToo ( 74388 ) on Monday November 27, 2006 @11:36AM (#17001852)
    Portability is not a trade off with optimization. If it is, you screwed up in your design, big time. In fact, writing portable code often means means higher quality code with fewer bugs. Fewer bugs means more time to optimize the over all code base. This means a better product over all.

    If you're wondering why portable code means a better product, it's simple. Generally speaking, portable code means you're using multiple compilers. Multiple compilers will identify potential bugs and general code problems much more quickly.

    Additionally, code which is designed to be portable up front also tends to be designed much better. This is because you have to have a strong low level API on which the rest of your code can sit. Violations of the design by coders is quickly identified once you start to compile on the other platforms as suddenly, it doesn't compile. You can then wrap knuckles as needed. The end is a product which is maintainable, readable, optimal, and well designed. Everyone wins.

    If any of these design houses had the slightest bit of a clue, they would already have a portable, low-level API in place which is common to all of their games. This directly translates into faster time to market, fewer bugs, higher quality product, shorter testing cycles, smaller support costs, etc... And as a bonus, they obtain two additional markets (Linux and Mac) for little extra cost; assuming they do something reasonable like OpenGL at the start. Not to mention, this opens the door for the console market as then can continue to add new platform support to their low level API. The only one that becomes problematic is the Xbox because, AFAIK, no OpenGL support.

    Let's face it, things like windowing, sound, input, networking, storage, and memory management is generally where the porting issues exist. If you go with OpenGL and a common, reusable library, suddenly the cost becomes moot as it is spread across n-games, as it gets reused. It's not like you have to write n-platforms when the gate opens. Heck, add to the library as you add platforms. Once a platform is in place, the next go-round is a freebe. I have no idea why coding houses are so dumb, but the math is easy to rationalize ad it just makes good business sense. Who doesn't want reduced support costs? Who doesn't want high quality games and happy, loyal customers? Who doesn't want two to three additional markets with greatly reduced effort and shorter time to market?

    Let's face it...good client/server games want Linux servers. Supporting networking, storage, and memory is half of the library. Let's face it...this really is a no-brainer but it shows how clueless most coding houses truely are.

  • Excuse me... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Svartalf ( 2997 ) on Monday November 27, 2006 @12:04PM (#17002306) Homepage
    Given that I know QUITE a bit on the subject (Heh... I port games over to Linux and right now I'm off that for a little bit doing driver development consulting for one of the two aforementioned players in 3D...), I think I should comment.

    Most of the extensions aren't ATI or NVidia specific that are usable. To be sure, they offer those, but most of the
    extensions are ARB or EXT extensions- they're intended to be used by either player and are typically provided by
    the same. The reality is that OpenGL 2.1 and DX9/10 are intrinsically identical except for programming style.

    Besides, you should abstract out your engine components if you've any aspirations to target the next gen consoles-
    DX10's NOT on PS3 or Wii, but OpenGL ES 2.0 IS and it's a clean, easy to use subset that ports back to MacOS and Linux.
  • by bettlebrox ( 264668 ) on Monday November 27, 2006 @01:36PM (#17003596) Homepage Journal
    There are some claims that Loki were doing well selling Linux games, but went out of business because of poor management decision: Google search [google.com]
  • by oc255 ( 218044 ) <milkfilk@nospam.yahoo.com> on Monday November 27, 2006 @04:09PM (#17006170) Homepage
    imho ... Blizzard is the massive exception to the rule. They write amazing code, they run an amazing operation. Of course, they also stay behind the tech curve (smart). Blizzard, Google (for how long I wonder), Apple (much lesser extent), ID did well with the Doom RPG but I don't know where they are heading ... it's odd, they need new IP or something.

    Back on topic, they are a massive exception to the rule. WoW is a AAA title can run OpenGL (mac/windows) and DX (windows), has very few bugs in constant change and has a subscriber base of 6+ million. I'd say there only one title that does that and one company that could pull it off. Not to mention the infrastructure, the tools, the customer service, the community, the vision of not punishing the player (ignore the official forums) all while not selling out too much. They use bittorrent (good and bad), use XML in the UI, use linux clustering (shards) for hosting, have a public API for community UI extensibility and even don't auto-renew your trial subscription behind your back (refer-a-friend).

    Sure, they use OracleDB and they exploit MMOs addictive qualities. So they might do some evil now and again. Angel of Heaven who has to sell crack to buy harp polish? Derailed here.
  • by the_greywolf ( 311406 ) on Monday November 27, 2006 @05:34PM (#17007410) Homepage

    Not true. NVIDIA's driver supports OpenGL 2.1 with full support for every feature of the GLSL - provided you've got the hardware for it. The latest version even adds a new GLX extension that the X server can use for hardware-accelerated compositing. ATi's driver, while it still mostly sucks, is at a similar level of advancement. OpenGL 2.0 support (last I heard) with GLSL support matching the Windows driver.

    The only drivers that would have problems running games like NWN2 (should it ever be ported) are things like Intel's GMA and crappy hardware like SiS chipsets and so forth.

    Then again, if that's all you've got, I've got to wonder why you're trying to make a fancy 2D graphics chip do 3D. Then again, you'd have an ATi or NVIDIA card anyway... Right?

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein

Working...