Maxis Developer on Linux Game Porting 364
friedmud wrote in to tell us about a comment from a Maxis developer, Don Hopkins, who did a partial linux port of "The Sims". You can find his post here (3rd one down, comment from Don Hopkins titled "Reality check from a game developer") in a LinuxGames.com forum. I don't know if I agree with his assertion that Wine is the best way to have games happen on Linux but his comments on the economics of Linux games development and especially the costs of keeping versions concurrent on multiple platforms are insightful.
SDL and other multi-platform libraries (Score:5, Informative)
Re:SDL and other multi-platform libraries (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:SDL and other multi-platform libraries (Score:5, Insightful)
But what about a UI library that doesn't draw the controls the same as the user's operating system? Look at Photoshop for Windows.. it looks like I'm using a Mac. I don't want that! I want an application that looks and feels like what I normally use. The best libraries will work like that, even though they have a cross-platform API. Linux versions will have the window manager look and feel. Mac versions will look like a Mac application.
RealBasic for Mac does this pretty well. Using a single source tree, RealBasic will compile for both Mac and Windows. The Mac apps look like Mac apps, and the Windows apps look like Windows apps. That transparency is what will win.
Of course, to make it easier for the developer can be a good thing. But to give the user a better experience is more important. Because if a user doesn't like your product, why bother?
Greg
Native look? That's where Qt comes in: (Score:2)
Windows [affinix.com]
Mac OS X [affinix.com]
Re:Native look? That's where Qt comes in: (Score:2)
Re:SDL and other multi-platform libraries (Score:3)
Right now companies are busy trying to wring every penny out of what they have. They could care lessabout attracting new customers or trying anything innovative. Any game development house that hasn't researched SDL or any of the non-platform specific systems is driving the nails into their own coffin.. I'd rather have my programmers using open source and ZERO cost tools than having to shell out several hundred thousand dollars every year for upgrades and license fees that are unneeded.
The other problem is finding programmers good enough and smart enough to be able to write software outside a GUI and IDE.
Universities today are cranking out CS degrees that can't comprehend a command line compiler let alone understand how to create a makefile by hand. and the fault lies directly in the hands of the professors.
Re:SDL and other multi-platform libraries (Score:5, Insightful)
That's really only true for Valve (Half-Life, Half-Life GOTY, Half-Life Gold, Half-Life Platinum, Half-Life You'll Buy This Too, Even Though It's The Same As What You Already Have, etc). Most other publishers might make a GOTY edition and leave it at that. However, if by wringing "every penny out of what they have" you mean making sequel after sequel, I don't see what your argument is. Especially since the good sequels do add innovative new features or items (let's ignore the Tomb Raider franchise, shall we?). As far as not porting to other platforms, I don't see how that's really an issue. Most game houses don't seem to have problems porting back and forth from consoles (PS2, PSX mainly) and Windows. They're not going to bother with Linux because it's such a marginal market. There's no money there, so why bother? And ignoring a valueless (monetarily) market is not going to kill a company. In fact, porting to that market just might kill them instead.
Note that
Because we all know that only poor, stupid programmers use IDEs ... (btw, all the Visual Studio compilers (for C++, VB, C#, Jscript, and so on) can be used strictly from the commandline, using makefiles or build scripts, and you can use any editor you want to write the code they compile -- vim, emacs, notepad, Source Insight, Visual Studio, or whatever)
Red Herring. It's not a University's job to produce automaton that can write a makefile or compile the latest 'sploit by hand. If that's what you expect from a CS program, you'd do better to save money and go to a tech school (or alternatively, save money buy hiring a student out of a tech school). A properly educated CS student may not know how to write a makefile or use gcc from the commandline right out of college, but I can guarantee you that s/he will be able to learn how to do that quicker than your average self-taught or tech school programmer can learn to analyze the performance considerations of various search algorithms (for instance).
Re:SDL and other multi-platform libraries (Score:2, Interesting)
The way to make developers ditch DirectX in favor SDL is not by talking, argue, pushing, debate, but to show them.
It would take one game to prove SDL's merits. A game with blisteringly fast 3D-engine, beautiful graphics, jawdropping soundtrack, pricewinning storyline. Put it on one single DVD that runs on any OS (Linux, *BSD, BeOS, AmigaOS, MorphOS, MacOS(/X), QNX, Windows and any other SDL-enabled OS) and get it out to the gameshops.
This would go a long way to prove that you can reach "any" platform, that you can use SDL without any loss in quality or speed, and you can do this with little extra cost.
Is SDL up to the task? Is the community?
Re:SDL and other multi-platform libraries (Score:3, Insightful)
An interesting point. Take me, for instance. I have bought a lot of windoze software (mostly games), but never any software for Linux, although I use Linux for everything but a few favorite games.
Why? Maybe it has to do with economy of scale. Since commercial Linux software sells less than windows sw, it is less tested, therefore potentially more buggy.
The solution would be for software sellers to include both versions in the same box. The largest parts of any software are data files. Including an additional set of executable files wouldn't take that much space on a CD-ROM. I would readily buy software that gave me a choice of operating system.
Native ports are best! (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the best current approach involves Java, which can be either natively compiled (gcc 3.0) or run on a VM (JDK 1.4 should be quite good). Check out Arkanae [babeloueb.com] for an early preview. :-)
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Re:Native ports are best! (Score:2)
Re:Native ports are best! (Score:3, Informative)
That being said, at Java One I saw a game written completely in Java. It was definitely an interesting concept and it seemed to run pretty smoothly (it was a FPS-type), but it was damn ugly. That may be just that they didn't have the artists necessary for the models, but it sure wasn't quake3. The technology is almost there, but other posters are right, Java isn't great at graphics. Almost, but not quite yet.
psxndc
Re:Native ports are best! (Score:2, Interesting)
This really doesn't matter, since most folk won't want to download any decent game (too large with all the multimedia resources). Therefore you can bundle the VM (JRE) with the game, of course checking to make sure its not already installed. This is actually good in the sense that you proliferate a modern VM to more computers. :-)
That being said, at Java One I saw a game written completely in Java. It was definitely an interesting concept and it seemed to run pretty smoothly (it was a FPS-type), but it was damn ugly. That may be just that they didn't have the artists necessary for the models, but it sure wasn't quake3. The technology is almost there, but other posters are right, Java isn't great at graphics. Almost, but not quite yet.
That was an art issue...you can do anything with gl4java you can do with OpenGL 1.2 (in other words Quake, or Doom 2).
Did you see the Grand Canyon Demo [sun.com] at JavaOne? Pretty impressive stuff, also using gl4java! I think an Open Source Java flight simulator using the FlightGear [flightgear.org] art and other data is fine idea in fact. Anyone interested?
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Re:Native ports are best! (Score:2)
Check out gl4java [jausoft.com]. It is the graphics API used in Arkanae (linked in first post). It doesn't require , swing, or Java3D - just a 1.1 level VM. Not many commercial games use any GUI other than custom programmed 2D or 3D graphics.
In fact, gcj is ideal since gl4java could be ported to use CNI instead of JNI, which would gain efficiency. The same could be done for OpenAL and SDL bindings, which would be straightforward.
In fact, gcc, or more correctly gjc, only supports java 1.0.
Actually 1.1. On the gcj issue, I thought that was deprecated in the same way g++ was...but no big deal.
These being the facts, it is very unlikly that you will be able to do a game using java and gcc.
I don't think the word "facts" means what you think it means. ;-)
As for the VM, even with jit technologies Java is still no where near fast enough to do any modern style of game.
And you base this on what evidence? Arkanae would seem to be an existence proof that works against you. JDK 1.4 should improve things much more, mainly through the DirectBuffer mechanism.
Now dont get em wrong, java is a good choice for server side apps, its just not there yet for the client side.
It is there to the extent that if I were starting a game project today, I would definitely go with Java. The benefits far outweigh the drawbacks, IMNSHO.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
just say no to ports (Score:2, Interesting)
game developers need to write to a cross-platform gaming library like sdl. then all the os-specific and hardware-specific enhancements can be developed in the library by people who enjoy those sorts of things and game developers can spend their time developing games. and the users are happy because they can spend time playing games instead of being concerned needing a specific os.
Remember Windows 95? (Score:5, Insightful)
And now everyone uses Windows.
Why?
Because it was still possible to play at least some dos games under Windows (because it was built on dos), and with for a bit of hassle, Windows would close, your game would run, you finish your game and windows would reboot.
Yeah, it wasn't neat, but it let people move to Windows 95 and still play their dos games. Once the user base was large enough, native games became available.
My point is, the argument against Wine is exactly the same.What I want to be able to tell people is
"Yeah, you CAN play all your existing Windows games under Linux! Try it and see! It's SOOOOO much better than Windows!!!".
Y'see, if we could get people using Linux more, the user base grows. Then it becomes more feasible to make native Linux games. Then the user base grows some more... See what I'm getting at?
If wine can play all windows games, we can get all those game loving people who won't try Linux because it hasn't got any games to try it and love it too.
Re:Remember Windows 95? (Score:2)
Re:Remember Windows 95? (Score:2)
So the consumer sees 10,000 native Windows titles and 10 native OS/2 titles on the store shelves, and thinks to himself "duh!"
MOD UP!!! (Score:2, Interesting)
I personally feel Transgaming is a Good Thing(TM); screw Loki for now until we have a -competitive- marketshare (I'd say at least 15%-20%) before native ports happen... we have the libs, yeah; we have the hardware; yeah... I hate to make this a "me too" post but everyone needs to get this point hammered down. Give the customer their PROGRAMS, and they will choose to come to Linux. Why??? Well, let's be the average Joe. Their programs don't have a need for 100 FPS (Why would they? They got a "deal" at Best Buy on an HP for $699!). Their OS is Windoze; it's not that they hate it, it's because they can't run their games (no matter how much you and I think they suck
Re:Remember Windows 95? (Score:2, Insightful)
Its a shame. (Score:5, Insightful)
Having multiple target platforms is a serious headache, and Linux just isn't a big enough market. Most linux users are used to getting their software for free anyway, and probably have the technical savvy to score free versions of any software released. While I'm sure that there are plenty of honest people out there, the fact is that there are very few people who are going to pay for linux games.
Also considering the generally degraded performance of games under linux and the continued acceptance of DirectX as the standard for graphics, all make Linux development difficult.
I read recently that id doesn't want to release their next product under linux (historically they have been pretty good about that stuff) because its a support nightmare, and just really doesn't bring in that much revenue.
I think in order to start getting more native Linux games, Linux needs to prove itself as a consumer OS first. Once Linux starts to satisfy peoples needs easily (thats so important) then i think more people will start moving over, and once they do, then the linux games will start rolling in.
Re:Its a shame. (Score:2)
No. Those are tech savvy Windows users. I argue that most linux users understand the value of their free software and contribute accordingly. If I like a distro I'll donate or buy a boxed set. If I like a game that is in Linux, then I'll pay a reasonable price for it.
Re:Its a shame. (Score:2, Interesting)
Does that mean that you'll have the same problems? No. It's just people talking from experience. That is not trolling. What you and the previous poster have done is construed as trolling, but since you're carrying the linux battle flag, you don't see it as that.
It can work in both directions (Score:2)
Once the mindshare of Linux goes up, people will be more willing to develop for Linux. Until then, a good emulator means that people have to worry less about the MS F.U.D. about 'but what if you need Windows application "Y"'.
In the short term, however, it's problematic because it encourages people to just write for Windows -- however, we can encourage people to write wine-enabled extensions to their windows code which will allow them to take advantage of Linux capabilities. This may encourage a migration of users to linux/wine.
My quick guess (never having used wine) is that wine is likely to be a bit more expensive for heavily graphics intensive apps (like quake) than for more CPU intensive apps (like The Sims). Once again it's a question of using the tool that's appropriate for the job. For those jobs where WINE does the job, it's dogmatic and counter-productive to demand a 'native' Linux port.
On the other hand, insisting on WINE, whether it works or not, is a different problem in the other direction. Granted: It'd be nice to always have a linux base port, but politics and economics often directs otherwise.
Re:It can work in both directions (Score:2)
Re:same old bull again (Score:2)
Ignoring the most enthusiastic 10% of computer world makes sense?
10%????? You are WAY dreaming. Not even the Mac is 10% of the market. You would be lucky if Linux users were 0.1% of the market, and the percentage of those that ONLY have Linux available (versus dual boot) is probably even lower (0.01%?).
Re:same old bull again (Score:3, Insightful)
You're absolutely right. This always cracks me up when people say things like this. Servers are one thing, but there is no way in hell that Linux desktop marketshare is even remotely close to that of the Macintosh.
Articles like this prove it: The Sims has been available for the Mac nearly as long as it has for Windows, but where's the Linux version? I still have yet to see any credible evidence that Linux has any more than a negligable desktop market share, and I think your guess of 0.1% is generous. I use Linux on all of my low-end servers, but there's no way I'll waste a perfectly good desktop machine with it.
- j
Re:same old bull again (Score:2, Interesting)
Then don't worry about convincing me, post the reference for all the people who might be misled by my "trolling". Come on, I'm sure there are many people who are confused by all my rhetoric.
Think about it -- there might be game developers reading who might buy into my lies. Nothing like facts to bring the sunlight of truth into the dark void of deceit spread by people like me.
Go on -- jump out of the phone booth with that huge S on your chest and strike me down with your righteous information! Punish the disbeliever who doubts that Linux exceeds even 1% of the desktop market! Gather the forces of your links to the studies to strike a blow for Truth, Justice and the Free Software Way! Humble me with the power of your references, and the fury of your truth writ in burnished rows of letters!
I await the lesson to be adminstered.
Re:same old bull again (Score:3, Insightful)
There is no way anything close to '10% of [the] computer world' runs Linux. The most optimistic estimates of Linux's share relate to server installations, and often to websites run under Linux (the count of which can vastly exceed the number of actual machines running Linux). Since the vast majority of Linux machines are actually installed in offices/ISPs/server farms, this hardly seems like a market worth targeting by a gaming company. Maybe one day it will be, but it sure does not make sense now.
And just because Linux users are 'enthusiastic' does not mean they are any more likely to buy a game, any more than enthusiastic Solaris users are going to be more likely to buy a game that happens to run on Solaris. The few remaining Amiga users, for instance, are evidently very enthusiastic, but it would be a very poor business plan indeed that proposed catering to this enthusiastic market.
Re:Its a shame. (Score:2, Insightful)
1. There are tons of games that are never ported to Mac
2. It is probally easier to port games to mac because of the limited number of hardware configurations to support.
I just don't get it... (Score:5, Redundant)
Taking some extra time to port to linux and ship it on the same CD as the windows version doesn't seem like a bad idea. His talks about Wine are fine and all, and I can understand that.. but I really dislike his dismissal of whether or not it is native. AFAIK Wine still requires Windows. That is bullshit. I want a game to run on Linux. Linux. Not windows, not wine. Wine is Not an Emulator, Right?
It doesn't seem to take much to build a game using existing cross-platforms toolkits that rival Direct3d. OpenAL seems to be the largest gap to bridge.. but, this is a pointless rant so I'll end it.
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:2)
Wine hans't required windows ever, AFAIK. It certainly doens't now.
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe, but their code is already written for Direct3D, and that's what their developers know. They're not going to pour the money into training developers to use totally different tools and platforms, and pay for the development time to convert everything to OpenGL/AL/SDL whatever. Your points are valid, except in a case such as this - the code is already there, and they're not going to re-write it all.
I just know somebody is going to say, "open source it, we'll port it!" or something like that. But think about it - if you were a company like Maxis, would you give away the source code to your best-selling game that you've put millions into (and received that much as well)?
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:2)
Actually, what consumes millions is not making the software, it's creating the data. There are some good open source libraries and engines for creating games, but what makes a successful game is the storyline, the characters, the virtual environments, etc, and those can be copyrighted.
Unfortunately, in recent years game companies have begun to forget this. They are trying "advanced" features as selling points, rather than imaginative games. For instance, one old favorite of mine is the "Monkey Island" series. The latest sequel has a "three dimensional" GUI, but it seems to lack much of the imagination, originality, and sense of humor of earlier versions. Perhaps that story is just getting old, but I wonder if they really invested as much in creating a good story as they did in creating that new GUI.
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:2, Troll)
Linux is not worth it. Not 5 years ago, not today, not tomorrow, not a year from now. I have a game developer friend, he was enthused with Linux before he had to port his companies game; now he detests it and much of the (Linux gaming) 'community'.
OpenGL develops slowly and requires proprietary extensions for the newest video cards. Hardcore gamers are the last people on Earth who like to wait until their new-fangled video card and sound drivers are supported. Video card companies will support Quake because of it's mindshare. They don't support other companies near as well.
The development and support costs FAR outstrip the benefits of having a native Linux port. The bottom line in a truly cutthroat industry is how much ROI can you get. Last I heard, Q3's linux version didn't do well enough to justify further Linux targeted box sales (late release, blah blah blah, excuses), and the Quake series is probably the biggest, most popular commercial game among the
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:2)
Only the absolute Windows haters would grab the Linux only copy.
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:2)
Being a small buisness all linux network administrator for two different companies (concurrently) I feel your pain, even if it is a different realm.
You might want to tone it down a notch, as your statement comes across way too ideological. There are many instances where SDL and OpenGL make sence for game developers, even if it doesn't for the "latest greatest see realistic blood and guts" games developers. It may even make sence for them too, I wouldn't dismiss it.
In the market as it is today, I wouldn't want start the two year long development cycle for the killer game on ActiveX, only to find out that my compeditor reaches a larger market with SDL (PlayStation, Sega, etc...). I wouldn't want to try to make a name for myself in to a saturated ActiveX market and my compeditor actually make money on a more scaled back SDL production.
I just couldn't justify that kind of decision to my Boss, VC's, or share holders.
Plus, your competition is... (Score:2)
Yo Momma programs in ActiveX (Score:2)
Xbox [slashdot.org]
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:5, Insightful)
People said the same about windows games. "Why develop for Windows when everyone has DOS?". Well, corporate IT was moving towards windows, so the savvier game developers saw that people would soon have windows everywhere - and if there's one thing that people always do, it's play games when they should be working. Now corporate IT (at least in here in Europe and (according to reports) in Asia) is moving toward linux on the desktop and server.
OpenGL develops slowly and requires proprietary extensions for the newest video cards.
OpenGL development did slow down a bit. It's speeding up again now, thanks largely to Mac OS X. There may sometimes be extensions, but that's still better than the whole bloody thing being proprietary and at the whim of MS, like D3D is. There's a well-defined process for folding such extensions into future revisions of the OpenGL standard. OpenGL was designed to be extensible.
Also, the Direct* APIs are a bitch unless you code in MS-mutilated C++ - OpenGL has well-defined, easy to use, pure C and fortran bindings, as well as decent bindings for many other languages. - That's one of the reasons OpenGL is used for high-end applications, like CAD and scientific and engineering visualisation (my specialty). DirectX truly, deeply sucks for anything like that. OpenGL is also designed for very high poly-count stuff encountered in visualisation. OpenGL on linux is being developed enthusiastically, from the industrial side - visualisation front ends for $50000 numerical simulation software that used to run on SGI IRIX systems are now being run on Linux boxes. OpenGL isn't going to fade into obscurity anytime soon - the profits from a couple of licenses for the sort of software that really uses OpenGL can outweigh the profits from the sales of hundreds of thousands of copies of weenie windows games.
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:2)
And the argument isn't about OpenGL for $$$ CAD apps. It's about using it for $50 a pop consumer games that are obsolete and out of mind 6 months after they come out.
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:2, Insightful)
My previous post was countering stupid arguments like "people are using Direct3D for Games, therefore OpenGL is dead, therefore Linux is dead." - OpenGL isn't dead. I was attempting to illustrate that more powerful forces than the games market are keeping it alive - and as European governments start to use open source OSes on desktops (and they are doing so), then european games developers who want to make money will follow with linux games. The presence of OpenGL on Linux makes it very easy for them to do so, since chances are they already know OpenGL anyway.
There have been an amazing number of illogical attacks on OpenGL on
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:2)
I don't see why you attached your OpenGL comment to my post. I hardly tried to say OpenGL was dead. I just said it didn't make sense for game developement in most cases.
To reiterate: *all of my comments are in relation to games on Linux* I hoped to Jebus that I wouldn't have to type out every exception and write a 2,000 word essay on my background and beliefs to jsutify my comments.
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:2)
Best UNIX for Games? (Score:2)
P.S. Thanks for native build of "The Sims" on Mac OS X and supporting Linux in general.
WineX could work iff.... (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:WineX could work iff.... (Score:2)
Re:WineX could work iff.... (Score:2)
Re:WineX could work iff.... (Score:2)
Re:You arent subscribed so dont talk (Score:2)
The Sims Hot Date (Score:3, Funny)
- The Sims Warm Feeling : you have to prepare the ceremony. Choose the right cake, find an affordable ring, discover friends to invite who aren't drinking buddies, select an appropriate church (avoid the ever treacherous Vegas drive-in wedding !) : will your marriage be successful, or will she say no ?
- The Sims Hot Waters : your mistress and you are busted ! dodge flying plates, try to watch the ball game amidst the shrieks : can you manage to stay married, or will you join the legions of single men again ?
- The Sims Cold Feet : you can't take it anymore, your family urges you to take a decision. Work harder to pay attorney fees : can you make enough money to win your divorce ?
Wine is important, but.. (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is: at the moment, the best gaming API
is Microsoft DirectX, like it or not, and
the likelyhood of DirectX becoming a cross-platform API is zilch.
So obviously, Wine is needed at the moment, partly as a windows-simulator,
but also as an implementation of DirectX on linux.
In the long run, however, It's unhealthy to be dependent on an API dictated by microsoft.
We need a new, open, alternative.
Perhaps SDL 2.0 [libsdl.org] or OpenGL 2.0 [opengl.org] is the answer needed?
Linux needs a killer DirectX-killer-API, much in the same way DirectX was the
MSDOS-killer that moved games development to windows.
However, if wine is the future of linux gaming,
we are (indirectly) giving that future to Microsoft.
Re:Wine is important, but.. (Score:2)
Not that MS would ever sell it, but stil...
Re:Wine is important, but.. (Score:2)
The fact is that most development houses will only program for one API and they will choose the one that is reaches the largest parts of the market. If another API can reach an equal amount of people, while being clearly superiour and not costings lots of money for retraining, then you can expect to have game developers actually use it.
If you can prove that an cross-platform API will make you sell substantially more copies of a game, without it being a support nightmare, you have a winner.
Personally I think there is a bigger chance of having gaming houses try to make sure that their game works fine with Transgamings DirectX-implementation, than switching API.
I really don't care if a game is native or not, if it works perfectly and seamlessly under Wine. It's not like it would look or feel any different, like the difference from at Qt/GTK+ -app to a Wine-app (like Word Perfect).
Might be repetitive or obvious (Score:2)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=23108&cid=2491 410 [slashdot.org]
Re:Might be repetitive or obvious (Score:2)
Reality... altered reality (Score:2)
The truth of the matter is that no matter how rich your protocol, you still have only a small portion of your code, on both the client and the server, dedicated to the protocol. It is entirely possible to have this part of the code isolated from the rest of the code, and for it to be completely platform independant. It's also possible to allow for updates to the protocol code independant of the rest of the code.
Most well implemented protocols have built in support for handling multiple versions of the protocol simultaneously (typically implemented through some form of extension mechanism or flat out versioning). I've worked on projects using extremely complex binary protocols which make games like Sims Online seem pathetic. It can be done.
The real reality is that most game houses have not yet developed this expertise, nor are they likely to in the near future. Furthermore, even if they DID develop this expertise, heck even if it cost them ZERO $'s to develop on an additional platform, it still doesn't make economic sense. Why? Because no matter how hard you try, each new platform dramatically adds to the support costs for the product. You now have to support a whole new set of OS bugs, train your tech support people on how to support a new platform, etc.
As everyone in the open source world knows, support costs are the real costs of software development. Until your userbase grows large enough outweigh the support costs, well, you won't get a lot of commercial software. So be it.
Platform-independent games (Score:4, Interesting)
"It is entirely possible to have this part of the code isolated from the rest of the code, and for it to be completely platform independant."
This applies nicely to other stuff too.
Have you seen the Unreal engine, responsible for Unreal, UT, Rune, Deus Ex and others? Video, audio, input, physics, etc. are implemented in C++ for speed. The game code ("when the player touches a gun lying on the ground, add it to their inventory" and so on) is written in UnrealScript, a compiled-to-bytecode language vaguely similar to Java. In the case of UT, you'd probably be surprised how much is done in Unrealscript (you could quite conceivably make a whole new game without changing the C++ bits, although you'd be stuck with a slightly older graphics engine that way).
I believe Quake 3 uses a similar system (mostly so that auto-downloaded mods can't carry viruses because they run in a Java-applet-like "sandbox"). This is why the UT and Quake 3 Linux ports consist of a smallish set of replacement binaries (the UT one is around the same size as the latest Windows UT update patch), and require a Windows CD to install from.
Well... (Score:3, Interesting)
I met Scott Draeker at the Game Developers conference on March 7 2000, about a month after The Sims shipped on Feb 4. I suggested that Loki port The Sims to Linux, because I was optimistic that it was going to be a popular game. He didn't seem to think so, and brushed me off, with a "go away kid, you're bothering me" attitude.
Just goes to show what a stellar business-man Scott Draeker is. Maybe that's why Loki's business is in the shitter and all of the good programmers jumped shipped months ago. If I were the Transgaming folks, I'd be happy that Scott Draeker was poo-pooing my idea as he has shown time and time again that he has no idea what he is talking about and in fact is often doing the exact opposite of what the right thing is.
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Hopkin's work on The Sims, the extremely popular high-selling game of the past year? His work on Pie Menus, which have become pretty much de facto standard on 3D Apps and other creative tools?
You must be one of Scott Draeker's blind lackeys if you'd dismiss him out of hand.
Loki is a big huge failure. Scott is to blame. The guy shouldn't even be managing a McDonalds.
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Scott Draeker is NOT the person you talk to about porting The Sims. You talk to someone in Maxis or EA corporate. THEN, you have someone who is someone give Scott a call.
No sh*t Scott copped a "go away kid, you're bothering me" attitude.
Sorry for the dual replies but I couldn't let the larger issue here slip. This type of logic is exactly why Loki was doomed from the start. Why should anyone from Maxis or EA give Linux a second thought when they are going to make insignificant revenue from it compared to the Windows version? Its Scott's job to go out there and sell these companies who make successful games on the vision of Linux gaming. If he can't do that, Loki has no reason to exist...
Who wants 3-5 year old ports of games that were shit to begin with (*cough*Postal*cough*)?
This sort of attitude just proves my point that Scott has no grounding in reality and his company was just a ploy to cash in on the Linux craze of a couple years ago. He should do his employees and his investors a favor and just kill Loki and sell off what he can and call it a day.
Re:Where do you get all your incorrect information (Score:2, Insightful)
^^^ What I was talking about, you charge even more than I was aware of.
I believe it was in the LinuxGames.com comments that someone complained the networking wasn't working (Note that you can't have networking without the working bit).
Then you proceed to charge even more outrageous sums of money, still for the simple original Sim City.
Congratulations Don, you could have been an innovator in these times of bad sales for Linux ports, and yet you choose to be hurting the market with allowing non-native ports under your nose. Thanks for nothing.
Re:Where do you get all your incorrect information (Score:2, Insightful)
slow news day (Score:5, Insightful)
Native vs. Emulated/Wine (Score:2, Interesting)
The most efficient way to develope a game to run on multiple platforms is to be able to use a single feature-full API that will run on any platform. Currently, the only fully featured game API is DirectX. SDL with OpenAL/GL and other such combinations have many features and work well, but they still can't compare with the feature set of DirectX. It is most efficient to use the DirectX API and develope an application for one platform, Windows, and have it run verbatim on the other platforms such as Linux using Wine.
Above is the most efficient and practical method for a game company to use, but the ideal method is completly different. The ideal method would be to develope a cross-platform gaming library which contains all features a game developer would need. Currently SDL with OpenGL and OpenAL is available for use, but this combination is still lacking some features. So I see two roads that can be taken. The cross-platform gaming library can be extended to included the needed features and a standard can be decided on which all game companies will use. Or SDL with OpenGL and OpenAL can be used as a base and all other features can be coded into the given application. Either way would result in a native application. In the end the ideal method will also turn out to be the most efficient and practical, but in the current time frame it isn't. The choice is up to the game company to decide which time frame they want to work with. Large companies can go for the extended time frame and work towards the ideal situation, but smaller companies as is the situation for most, will have to go with the smaller timeframe and use Wine.
I hope the someday the ideal road will be acheived and everything will be native to all OSes. But until then, Wine will suit me just fine.
Feh (Score:3, Insightful)
As an avid gamer and coder, I'd have to say that linux really isn't going to catch the gaming market in the forseeable future. Call me a pessimist if you like, but that's the way I see it. Gaming may be a large market, but right now, the market is firmly entrenched on a Microsoft codebase. As the guy from Maxis pointed out, it's not that the tools aren't there, or that they're not professional quality...
Porting games really isn't a solution, as Loki found out... any gamer that's serious about playing isn't going to wait for the linux port to maybe make the rounds, if someone decides to pick it up... so they basically exist to serve two VERY niche markets... the "I won't run anything unless it's on linux" and the "I'd rather run it on linux" groups. Concurrent development for multiple architectures is indeed expensive and carries with it a lot of overhead, EVEN if it's planned from day one! While this may have benefits in the long term, as with the Sims linux code being used as a base for the Sims Online project, I believe that this is still the exception rather than the rule.
So, you a cry, a killer app is perhaps warranted? Difficulties abound in this scenario as well... any game that becomes immensely successful automatically spawns imitation... play-alikes would be appearing on the Windows platform in VERY short order, capitalizing on a much greater market that has been overlooked, purposefully OR unintentinoally, by the original creators.
Realistically, there's only one thing that will make Linux a commercially viable platform for which companies can develop games: Linus' plan for world domination(tm). The game companies will go where the money is, that is the simple truth... if the gamers come to Linux, the games will follow. Loki's "testing of the waters" showed that there isn't the demand yet to justify a supply.
As for the discussion on how to get people to Linux... well, that's a whole different can of worms, and one that I won't open in this thread. I should probably (knowing /.) add the caveat that when I'm talking about games, I'm talking about modern, commercial-quality games, with Hollywoodian budgets and all the bells and whistles.
Just my two cents...
Re:Feh (Score:2)
Kudos.
Re:Feh (Score:2)
Fine, call it a niche. But niche != nonexistent. Niche == opportunity for someone who wants to make some money.
I'm typing this on my Amiga, so I just have to snicker when someone calls Linux users a niche market, implying it's totally unviable or something. If you wanna see unviable ... oh,
never mind.
Re:Feh (Score:2)
Just because the Amiga niche is even smaller than the linux niche doesn't mean the Linux niche is economically viable... and remember, we're not referring to the Linux community as a whole, we're referring to gamers who use Linux...
Gaming on linux is much more difficult than gaming on windows... needed drivers often aren't there, unless you buy just the right hardware, you have to get the right drivers for the right game, set up the game to use the drivers, the list goes on, as opposed to popping the CD-ROM in the drive and clicking install. Lazy? You're damn straight... if I just picked up Quake9 or something like that, I don't want to have to spend hours futzing with drivers and config files and what not, I wanna frag something!
Until you can dumb down Linux to the point where it really is just click and go, you're going to keep a large portion of the market away, myself included, and I'm a big fan of Linux... I'm more than happy to use two OS's for different purposes, and treat my gaming rig like a big overblown console, and be productive with Linux.
Curses, foiled again! (Score:2)
My plot to paint an ominous picture of the open source movement has failed again! Bill will not be pleased! And I would have succeeded if it weren't for you meddling anonymous cowards!!!
Bioware? (Score:2, Informative)
I'd certainly like to know. Is it that they see a potential in linux gaming, or are they doing it out of good will? I'm unsure but it looks like they've snubbed directx and direct3d completely in favor of OpenGL.
(before anyone asks "when is it coming out?" go here [planetneverwinter.com])
Console vs. PC vs Multiple PC Development (Score:5, Insightful)
Consoles have a lot of advantages. They are stable same-same environments. Not a lot of variance, since there is only one manufacturer for each one. There have been some companies that have questioned making games for PCs entirely becuase of the wide variance in the hardware, let alone the operating system.
Many companies make two versions now, one for their console-of-choice and another for Windows/Intel PC platform.
Guess which one is the support nightmare. Pretty easy when you have to support several different video card manufacturers, even ones that don't exsist any more like VooDoo. Yet, the small, vocal, they-will-get-my-VooDoo-when-they-pry-it-from-my-
Different versions of Windows, cheap, God-awful systems from Best Buy and Circuit City, poor white box mail order, you name it, and its a problem on the PC platform.
So, is it a Windows vs Linux thing? Not really. Unless Linux becomes the dominant desktop environment, or at lest has double digit percentage numbers, its a useless question. Developers don't REALLY want to develop on the PC to begin with because of the high support cost, and they are certainly NOT going to develop for a low desktop marketshare OS like Linux.
Think about this anyway: If they did, they would only support it on Red Hat anyway,(market share and mind share again) and then you would bitch about that. This community will only be happy if there are NATIVE Linux games that work on every distro. Ain't gonna happen. Be happy there is still a market for PC games at all.
Re:Console vs. PC vs Multiple PC Development (Score:2)
Guess which one is the support nightmare. Pretty easy when you have to support several different video card manufacturers, even ones that don't exsist any more like VooDoo. Yet, the small, vocal, they-will-get-my-VooDoo-when-they-pry-it-from-my-c old-dead-hands crowd clamors for support and then whines when they can't get it.
I'd beg to differ... both Windows and linux have sets of standard-ish API's that developers can use in their applications to abstract away hardware considerations to the point where it's not an issue... DirectX, OpenGL/AL, SDL, etc... In this respect, gaming development in the console and desktop arenas are actually converging... while console developers can expect a common hardware platform which will behave identically on any given system, PC developers are rapidly approaching a common hardware abstraction which will also (ideally) behave the same on any given system. While the Linux API's may lag behind a little bit
Re:Console vs. PC vs Multiple PC Development (Score:2)
Sonofabitch, I kicked my keyboard out of the damn socket =) To finish my post... while Linux API's may lag behind a little bit, the article's author states that the "quality gap" is rapidly closing between the two, and that linux gaming API's aren't what are holding back the developers.
Re:Console vs. PC vs Multiple PC Development (Score:2)
I am not sure that the hardware abstraction is moving ahead, but I would also argue that that still is a long way off. There seems to be a great deal of incompatibility out there.
Case in point would be the the recent release of Tribes 2. Tribes 2 is an OpenGL game that experienced a LOT of hardware issues on PC platform. I certainly don't want development on PC platforms to cease.
There will always be platform specific issues. These will continue to pose a problem. It's not neceessarily the overriding factor but, it is a factor. PC hardware varies too widely and changes too rapidly to ever really be completly extracted from the developer. IMHO.
Platform indenpendent API? (Score:2)
What might be a much better approach is to find a solid API that is compatbile with both systems. I'm sure somebody could write something far superior to DirectX and could provide compatibility for both Linux and Windows. The economics to fund such an endeavor might not be there but it definitely would be in the interests of Game Developers (so they could cooperatively fund some open source effort).
Wouldn't it be nice if a game could be ported between Linux, PC, X-box, PS2, Game Cube, and Macintoshes with little need for changes to the code. Then it would make the task of supporting multiple platforms nearly trivial. Basically I'm thinking something akin to Java, but written very specifically for gaming.
Killer Apps (Score:4, Insightful)
Linux is good for server applications, but *really*, what can it do that Windows/Mac cannot do, other than not crash as often? Very little... Why is this? Between platforms, Linux does little more than ape most of what anyone running Windows/Mac can already do, and far FAR simpler... Can Linux be used optimally for graphic design and video production without any hassles of hopping between CLI and GUI? Nope... Can Linux be used for mainstream business applications and gaming without doing the same, or relying on emulation? Nope... Face it, Linux relies on a few adequate programmers attempting to reinvent the wheel, or emulating an OS that already exists with far less BS to fight through to get the job done...
THIS is why Linux fails... This is why Linux isn't replacing 100% of Windows desktops...
This is not a flame, this is constructive cricism... The problem with Linux is that there are plenty of people willing to rally around the banner, but very few willing (and able) to actually go to war for it... Linux, in order to fight against the two big shots, is to make some applications that are COMPLETELY unlike what is already on the market, and unique in what it can provide... Make something, ANYTHING, that can either (a) supplant existing applications (make a graphic editor far superior to what can be found on Windows or Mac platforms, with a GUI to allow you to use it, artists traditionally don't LIKE to have to haggle with CLI's just to draw, I'm an artist, I KNOW this), and (b) provide a program that is completely unique, anything that the existing Windows/Mac scene has completely overlooked... Use your imaginations, you want the OS to succeed, then FIGHT so it can, instead of pretending that just being crashproof is the lone cause for it's acceptance...
What good does a bulletproof jacket do you in a world where everyone fights with rocket launchers?
Fixing a weak spot (Score:2, Insightful)
So how do we push Linux (and unix in general) as a usefull game platform? Obviously we need to present game programmers with a programming interface that they can use to port games to (or ideally write original games for). Like GTK+ is for GUI applications (or Qt, depending on your religion), we need the "GTK+" of the game world. Some kind of library that:
1. Is portable
2. Is extendable
3. Can make use of hardware acceleration
4. Can grow with future graphics/sound technology
5. Is based on _some_ kind of industry standard
Number five is VERY important. A standard has to be agreed upon or developers are just going to shrug Linux off as a bunch of non-standard API's each evangalized by their own creator but no one else.
What we have been seeing lately, is too many chefs spoiling the soup. Everyone and his uncle has their own API they are trying to push, and no one is working together to agree on a standard.
You aren't going to like this but I'll say it anyway. The reason Windows has caught on as a game playform is because of DirectDraw and DirectSound (and to a lesser extent hardware-accellerated OpenGL). Simply, developers don't have to worry about writing their own routines to allocate video memory, access the sound card's dma buffers, etc. etc., because Microsoft for once provided a pretty decent standard API to write to, that everyone could pretty much agree on.
Everytime someone announces his own "KICKASS GAME API" we (the Linux/unix community) actually suffer a set-back. We slip farther from the goal of having a single, open, standard API for mainstream developers to rely on.
Fortunately we have things like Mesa, which seems to "Get It". I'm not going to advertise Mesa more than I have to, suffice to say it meets all of the five criteria I mentioned above. Personally I believe time spent on writing APIs that essentially do what Mesa already does is time wasted. LOOK INTO MESA before you decide to write "Yet Another Graphics API".
On the other hand, we have sound support on Linux. Currently it's a mess. Basically application writers need to directly access the sound driver in order to get any kind of noise working. We currently have no standard _OPEN_ API to work with, and for the most part sound capabilities under linux are limited to a single process using a sound card. This will not fly with game developers.
Like the graphics world, we need an sound API that:
1. Is portable
2. Is extendable
3. Is hardware-independant
4. Allows more than one process/thread access to sound hardware simultaniously (a mixer)
One thing I have seen that looks promising is eSound. Do your own research on it but it looks pretty nice, and it will get the job done if its developers continue to do "The Right Thing".
It is important for us small-time game developers to look for APIs like Mesa and eSound, which are implemented properly and have potential to become some kind of standard, rather than latching on to one that has cool screenshots but only had a single game written to them--or worse, just writing our own game API.
Re:Fixing a weak spot (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm a Windows user. Windows 2000 specifically, because of its more powerful command line interface and more crash-resistant GUI, but still a windows user.
The problem in my eyes is that Linux has no central figure directing development. For those who would jump up and yell "Linus!" think again - he's doing the OS core but not terribly much else in this area. In the Windows world, where Microsoft is on 80-95% of desktops depending on how you count, MS drives the entire industry. DirectX is *the* API. It killed off Glide, and OpenGL doesn't seem to be doing terribly well either now. Why? Because it's standard. It comes with the OS and it comes preconfigured to *work* with the OS.
I have psuedo-Linux (Cygwin/XFree86 running KDE 1.1.2) installed and am learning how to use it. I hope to one day shed my chains of Microsoftness and become Enlightened, but I'm struck by the complexity of it all. I just learned how to mount drives. I still don't know how to install software. Every time I try it tells me my GCC can't produce executables. No mention on how to fix this, however.
Linux is, for many average *gamers* too difficult of a market to bother wasting time on. 9/10 of games are for a gamer, not a *geek gamer* which the Slashdot community is. With the exception of hard-core simulators (NOT the porn kind to all trolls), everyone the game company cares about is running Windows. Why spend $$$ porting to another platform?
I don't agree with that personally, but it makes sense in a business way.
JKoebel
Bootable CD's.... (Score:2)
Of course the biggest problem with this is knowing what hardware the user has - especially video cards - and making sure that a large number of video cards support a standard set of well known API's accessable from drivers written for Linux. Without this, the idea falls on its face.
I know! It shouldn't be too hard to convince all the video card makers that it's in their best interest to release open source drivers for their cards... oh wait.... nevermind.
Commercial Game Attitude? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm doing the Linux port because I prefer to develop in Linux and the libraries are all cross-platform, but I don't really expect the Linux port to sell well. I also expect to get flamed for not releasing source.
It occurs to me that startup companies could offer a great deal to Linux, but the community seems only interested in giving money to established companies and complaining that the new guys want to charge money. Almost every commercial/shareware game on happypenguin for example has a comment saying "it would be better with source code" or "I refuse to use it because its not free".
Re:Commercial Game Attitude? (Score:2)
But games are a different. Games don't need support. You can't make money off an open source game. Your business doesn't rely on a game to run. You don't really need a game at all.
I look at games as the same as movies. They are entertainment. No one asks for open source movies. Sometimes I guess, it might be fun to have the source code to a game but it's not necessary.
You will probably get flamed by people asking for the source code. People who do that are wusses. I think most people are more reasonable than that.
Re:Commercial Game Attitude? (Score:2)
But you don't HAVE to have games, you don't benefit in any way from having a non-educational game with the exception of pleasure and I think it is acceptable to pay to be entertained.
How about... (Score:3, Interesting)
They would then control thier own destiny - as long as they could resist $ from marketing deptartments - and would have a common set of APIs to support in thier games.
If a game didn't run on PlatformX because of a malformed API, the author of the API implemenation would be on the hook, not the gaming company. IOW, the game authors hold all the trump cards, no one else.
SDL seems to be an atempt at this already, but is it coming from OSS developers or game developers? The difference is important.
Soko
Re:How about... (Score:2)
Conflict of interest, NDA's, IP issues abound. It would be tough for any game developer to really have a significant impact on a truly OSS library. The minute it became large, his or her employer would want to make it proprietary, and probably could do to the all the legal stuff. What motivation does any company have to share its code freely? Why give competition help? Now, former game developers or independant game developers might be able to do this, but its tough for industry developers. Of course, this is just my guess.
Kevin
Re:How about... (Score:2)
I said nothing about code either - just API specs that game deveolpers all agreed on and would develop to, then ram it down the throats of the OS developers. The $ in savings of basically coding a game once and then supporting that single code base will likely make them co-operate with each other until the spec is done.
Soko
Here's an idea (Score:2)
Notice how ID, the only gaming company around to actually follow this principle, can port their games to a zillion OSes very quickly and have it run extremely well on all OSes that they're ported to. The most expensive part of of doing Linux releases for ID is publishing...
Tying yourself to a proprietary API makes anything you say about portability completely invalid...
JMO
The obvious conclusion (Score:2)
So I guess what this all boils down to, is that Windows needs a Linux emu-- excuse me -- loader and API wrapper.
More Sims porting happening (Score:2, Informative)
A native version is the way to go. I'm in the same boat as Don, although he's got more access to the code than I do. I generally go through him to get the code I need. When the issue of providing a Mac version came up because most of the utilities wouldn't work under VirtualPC, I looked toward some cross-platform library rather than emulating with Wine or whatever Transgamer is providing. I settled on wxWindows (between a choice of QT and wxWindows) just because of the licencising issues around QT (I'm not in a position to release any Sims code and bound by NDA to not).
The big issue was the fact that The Sims was completely dependant on DirectX (even though they try to abstract it out in some of the wrapper libraries they have) so the first thing I did was to port all the graphics code to OpenGL. Don and I have been communicating as well and had some success with porting some of the lower level functionality of the game engine to use Python via SWIG wrappers.
I think one of the key things here with any game development is that the commercial developers should look at writing portable code. Maybe they don't have to take the effort of writing the code for those other platforms (whatever they may be depending on what you call your base platform) but at least take the effort to provide those hooks with little effort. Don't tie yourself into a proprietary API and put the platform dependant features in the platform dependant code where it belongs, separate from the main code. But then that's just stating the obvious right?
liB
Zork: granddaddy of multiplatform (Score:2)
Re:Any idea to port at all? (Score:2)
Re:Any idea to port at all? (Score:2)
I'm an open source geek, and I do pay for software; in fact, just last week I bought a copy of Redhat Linux 7.2. I pay for games too, and I don't even care if they're closed source -- WTF, they're just games. But for the same reason, I'm completely uninterested in Linux games. My PS2 is more than enough to satisfy my gaming needs, and it does a better job at it than Linux will ever do.
Re:Why not games on Novell? (Score:3, Funny)
I have that system. It's called a PlayStation2.
Re:Why not games on Novell? (Score:2)
Re:You might be wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
IMHO, no game is going to lure people away from Windows. Think about it:
There is a user that runs windows and buys games that run on windows. Now, one game is ported to Linux, but it also runs on windows! Why would they switch? There's no need, that game already runs on windows, as does every other game they own, and the overwhelming majority of games due to come out.
Really, what is so *great* about Linux that will lure the gamer from windows? The lack of games? The lack of driver support? Or maybe the fact that it's completely different than everything they know?
Now, if the Sims 2 came out *only* for Linux, you might have something!
Re:You might be wrong (Score:2, Funny)
Re:You might be wrong (Score:3, Insightful)
>The freedom. The lack of crashes. The configurability.
I think of them, then I realize that linux DOES crash (often in really archaic ways)... I think about how much I really care to configure my game machine, and I configure about the "freedom" of not being able to play games because I'm using linux.
IMHO linux is as robust as it is because it lacks a lot of the little touches that windows has. If all you want to do is program and run servers, use linux... But if you want a user friendly environment that plays games well, use windows.
Re:Real world, eh? (Score:2)
Re:True (Score:2)
As someone else has pointed out, IBM tried the exact same route with OS/2, which did run Windows better than Windows, with predictable results. The problem was Windows kept 'evolving' and many of the later (not much later, at that) Windows apps just did not work. For the larger purposes of Linux evangelizing, Windows emulation is worthless if it is not 100%, because nist people are just going to be PO'ed at anything less.
Re:True (Score:2)