Half-Life 2 - A Linux User's Lament 792
jvm writes "If you're a gamer with a pulse, you've probably heard about the impending release of Valve's Half-Life 2. As a gamer and a Linux user, I always get a little stirred up about the whole Half-Life situation, where we have a dedicated server but no client. So here's my reflection on the sad situation, past and present. How will the rest of the Linux gaming community react to the release of Half-Life 2? Boot into Windows? Wait for WINE or WineX support? Get the Xbox version? With so many Half-Life servers running on Linux, will the same be true for Half-Life 2?"
I have a lament too (Score:5, Funny)
*caps is like yelling so you have to offset it with lowercase text*
Re:I have a lament too (Score:3, Insightful)
So, I'll admit it: I'm going to play Half-Life 2, on WindowsXP, the day it is released. And, I bet, the next day, and the next day, and the next day, . . .
Use your real name (Score:3, Funny)
It's sadly amusing that we get lessons in morality from somone that doesn't even have the wherewhital to use their name.
Oh, wait... this is Slashdot.
Re:Use your real name (Score:4, Funny)
Why just last week, I read an amusing peice by the poster Foobarblaz. I remembered him from last year; I believe he's a male causcasion, 25 years old, lives in a 2 bed rented house in PA.
You idiot.
Re:Use your real name (Score:4, Interesting)
Sounds like Activation to me.
I haven't bought HalfLife
But no, its not "real" Activation. real activation is where the program will not work at all (or only for a brief period) before you need to communicate with the mothership, and get authentication keys based on your hardware/software configuration.
You can play single player HalfLife forever. You can play LAN games of HalfLife forever.
I'm not sure you can play on the internet without your CD key being validated by WON servers though - this is borderline, but not quite as bad since its just a key you got when you bought the CD(and not something calculated based on the system set) - of course you have the problem if the servers go down, or gets taken down. As we can see now, they are changing to their new EvilWare system "Steam" and will remove the Won servers, at that point most people will be forced to use steam (or quite likely someone will hack the game so it can play without)
ID as usual did it better, they had a CD key as well, but if the game was unable to authenticate with the server it would still allow you to play (presumably there was some other penalty, such as you couldn't join some servers who insisted on a validated id)
Re:I have a lament too (Score:4, Insightful)
What does buying a game that runs on Windows have to do with sacraficing principles? It's a computer. "Not liking Microsoft" is not a significant principle in the grand scheme of things.
Re:I have a lament too (Score:3, Interesting)
They are like shoes you see. Some are appropriate to stomp around in the dirt with. Some are better for formal situations, and some are jsut plain compfortable.
Draw the analogy anyway you like, I own Quake 3 for Linux and I never ever did get it running to my satisfaction. The support for Linux Gaming just isn't there.Is that such a bad thing. Does Linux have to be all things to all people? It is wonderful and beautiful in it's niche but without a lot of wor
Re:I have a lament too (Score:4, Insightful)
Just because someone is charging you for a word processor that could theoretically be given away does not entitle you to a free word processor. In life, nobody is entitled to anything, period. People could theoretically build cars for free, but it doesn't happen. Just because it seems like a cheap investment doesn't mean that typing on a computer all day to make your living should be done for free.
Slashdot wouldn't exist if there weren't programmers getting paid for what they're doing. They get paid when the company they work for makes money off of a product. That means somebody is selling something. Ideology is poor currency at the grocery store.
petition ......... (Score:3, Insightful)
Instead of signing a petition, wait till a company
comes out with a linux game, and BUY it, buy 2 or 3 for your friends. Thats how we will get good games on linux.
petition with your wallet...
HL2 has an Interesting price model (Score:5, Informative)
Email and reply from some bloke and the HL2 pr bloke, Gabe.
--
Gabe Gabe Gabe!!!
As I'm sure you are aware the HL2 community is going crazy with the rumour that HL2 is going to be like a MMORPG and you will have to pay a fee each month via Steam to play HL2 multiplayer.
I don't believe this to be true but can you please put it to rest once and for all. PLEEEEEEASE.
Kind Regards
Matt
Here's my current thinking: Some people want to buy Half-Life 2 in a store. Right now we have three SKUs planned at three price points. One will have single-player only and not play MODs and we think of that as the mass market SKU (sold mainly at the Costcos and Walmarts of the world). The second is our traditional single-player plus multiplayer SKU that runs MODs and is sold at places like EBX. The third is the collector's edition SKU with lots of cool bonus stuff for people who like cool bonus stuff.
In the Steam world, some people will want to buy it once, like the middle SKU above. Other people will want to buy the game on subscription (e.g. $9.95/month). The good news for the "buy it once" crowd is, well, they only have to pay once. The bad news is that when we come out with new content (expansion products, TF 2, and presumably other games) then they have to pay separately for those. We're pretty sure that the $9.95 guys are going to get the better value, as we've been pretty good over the years at generating a lot of content.
Now nobody has done this before, so we're scratching our heads and massaging the plans to make sure we've got the best set of options. We've had some feedback that we should sell the top SKU (single-player only no MODs) on Steam, and my reaction has been "yeah, right, for the three people in the world who have a broadband connection, are sophisticated enough to purchase software over the Internet, but DON'T want to play MODs and multiplayer". Some people have said "I want a subscription, but I think the box and the manual are cool, so what about sending me those" and I think that's pretty interesting and we're trying to figure out what to do for them (needless to say Sierra isn't exactly jumping for joy at the idea of selling us boxes so people don't buy Half-Life 2 in stores).
But nowhere has there been a suggestion that people pay in the store and then pay a monthly fee on top of that a la the MMORPG.
Gabe
Re:HL2 has an Interesting price model (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, uh, right. I recall the Half-life website going over 2 years without a single update. I downloaded Steam 2.0 and not a single feature has been added to any of the games in months and months.
The Counter-Strike crew did most of their work before joining the ranks of Valve. The Half-life engine was riddled with hacks and cheats, which took months to get patched.
My take on the Sierra/Valve thing is they had the right game at the right time. A good 32 player supporting engine that ran on your average machine of the day. TFC, even though it's graphics were bad compared to others, had great potential for people to actually work in teams. All this stuff was extrodinary at the time.
Yes, Tribes2 looked nicer and was a more advanced game, but you need a serious machine to run it. What fun is multi-player when it's requirements are so demanding that only a very few people will be able to play?
I guess what I am saying, in so many words, is.. Don't get too excited about a game that hasn't come out yet. The whole industry is geared around hype surrounding sequels. We, as the customers, fall for it every time. We get excited, hoping to re-live the excitement of what once was new. This hasn't been happening lately, as most studios are investing millions into making a game look pretty and have all the latest beats, but forget to make it fun.
I'm just negative..
Not sure I can sympathize (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Not sure I can sympathize (Score:5, Funny)
why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Insightful)
Money talks, bullshit walks. With Microsoft you get both.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:3, Funny)
So that would be... expensive talking bullshit?
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Interesting)
Who knows, maybe we will see a native Linux version, but you can't hold your breath for it.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Interesting)
Ut2003. I bought 4 copies of it BECAUSE it works with linux.
I gave out 2 of the copies to friends with a copy of redhat.
I also used to do the same with the other games available from loki, and constantly told people to go to loki.
I ave over 20 commercial games that work on linux on my shelf. Many more games than I ever have bought for windows, and I know that I am not alone.
Linux gaming is at the point where Mac Gaming has been for the past 10 years, hopefully it will increase in the future, but the only way to do it is to be good advocates and make noise with our wallets AND tell the companies that you bought their product BECAUSE of the linux version.
Comparisons to Mac Game Market wrong (Score:4, Insightful)
The Mac Game Market is not a useful comparison, the Mac and Linux situations are different. Counting users is a mistake. The Mac situation wildly differs from Linux in that Mac users can not dual boot or effectively emulate. On the Mac they not only have to emulate the APIs but the CPU instructions as well. For modern games it a native version or nothing. On the other hand Linux users can use the Win32 version of the game. Most Linux gamers dual boot or use Wine so they are already customers. Targeting Linux does not generate any new money from them, it merely replaces a Win32 sale with a Linux sale. That's a money losing situation for the developer. The Linux Game Market only consists of those Linux Gamers who would never buy the Win32 version, those who would do without rather than dual boot or use Wine.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Informative)
HL2 is a very different beast to HL1 and even Quake 3 and UT2003, it takes a completely different approach to rendering, and implementing it using the tools available on Linux would be very, very hard.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Informative)
You will have to tell that to my GeforceFX5900 and Unified Nvidia Driver that has full support for all the functions you speak of via nvidia cg or via another none ARB rendering path. Now...since there is only one other chip maker that is making a card with PS2.0 (as people like to call it) that would be ATI...you only in turn have one company not supporting the technology they would need in linux. ATI has always been a joke in the 3d market with Linux so this is nothing new and Nvidia has a greater market share of high end 3d cards in both the Windows and the Linux market....so who cares?
They could have easily written that engine using OpenGL and had a VERY portable engine. But naw...they are getting some luvin from MS and ATI, so what do you expect.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:4, Insightful)
Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself.
This was insightful? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Insightful)
ID and Activition are both releasing competitors to Half-Life 2 (Doom 3 and Unreal Tournament 2004) that will run on linux, and I would strongly recomend either of them over HL2 soley based on principal. If you just buy the damn game like they want you to, and never demand alternative OS support, they're never going to care.
It's too bad, really, because hl2 looks like a spectacular game.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, how short the geek memory. Remember Loki [lokigames.com]? A company that tried to bring mainstream games to the Linux platform?
The problem is, while geeks talk the talk, they don't walk the walk with their wallets. There simply isn't a market for games on Linux. A few people might buy a Linux copy, sure, but the majority will buy the Windows version when it's released, then demand the Linux version for free when it's finished porting.
Games companies are in business to make money. They're not charities, and even if they were, even charities need money to operate. Valve is simply making what it believes to be the best decision based on its reading of the market.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Informative)
Had the company been managed properly, they'd still be around today, and going strong. Linux would have a much stronger influence on game companies pondering to make a linux port, and if they were successful, there would be other serious competitors. Alas, the chance was lost, only because people at the top had the wrong vision.
At least we got SDL out of it.
-Restil
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:4, Interesting)
You might have done - but you are not representative of the games market as a whole. If you were, Loki would still be in business.
How many times does this have to be said? (Score:5, Interesting)
Scott bought some 50k units of those stupid tins, etc. and delayed the release of the Linux version (which SHOULD have went out only a week or so AFTER the Windows version) by nearly a month. Worse, he wasted the money on the massive production run when he should have done something more reasonable like 5k units to limit his losses. Had he done that, the margins per unit would have been smaller, but the game might have broke even.
Loki bit off more games than they could comfortably afford and did pathetically stupid business decisions with the ones they DID have.
THAT is what killed Loki.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:4, Informative)
The 3D driver situation in Linux is hardly bogus any more.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Informative)
You've still got to test on every platform you support, you still have to train your support staff on every platform you support, etc. Have you ever worked on a large, commercial multi-platform product? If you had, you would know that the code is only part of the work involved, and over the lifecycle of the product, it's even just a small fraction of the work.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:4, Informative)
Platform-testing? Big deal. What do you think Internet beta's are for? Support staff? Last I heard, most of the big-game companies *shopped their support services* to 3rd parties
No, you're just not getting the point. The point is, a 'port' is not expensive if you don't do it last. If you do multi-platform development concurrently, and have a technical strategy in place to accomodate it, then it doesn't cost any more than to just do one-platform...
Doesn't mean that they can't offload that work... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Remember tuxgames.com? (Score:3, Insightful)
This may be hard for you to understand, but outside of the "geeks" no-one cares about Linux except as a way to make money.
And get this: even Red Hat doesn't. They're a corporation just like Valve.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:4, Insightful)
I mean, there would be 3 parts in the costs:
1. General development of the Game
2. Implementation for windows
3. Implementation for Linux
Now costs for #1 would be devided over all sales.
Costs for #2 would be devided over all sales for Windows.
Costs for #3 would be devided over all sales for Linux (being... whell... a few thousand?)
A realistic price for the game on windows would be 50 or 60 euro's (forgive me, I am in euroland). A realistic price for linux would be 250 - 350 euro's.
Now, it's very nice of those folks at ID et al that are pretty much helping out Linux-users by taking Linux R&D costs and include them in the windows-variant. But would you, Linux ubergeek, *want* those darn windowsusers to pay for your product?
Dumb question. I know.
SiggyRadiation.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Implementation for windows
3. Implementation for Linux
If the product is targeted cross-platform then (2) and (3) are only very thin layers on top of (1). In such case a good programmer would implement (1) by using cross-platform APIs like OpenGL, OpenAL, and SDL. Therefore, in a cross-platform environment (1) isn't more expensive than it would be in a single-platform environment. The next good thing about such implementation of (1) is that a port to even more platforme, like MAC or PS2, is also very cheap.
In the special case of HalfLife2, where the game engine seems to be implemened by using DirectX, a client port is more or less a complete rewrite of the whole engine. Therefore, I don't expect to see ports of the game to any other platforms then MS Windows and X-Box.
Anyway, there are other games for linux, like BUG-HUNTING 2.6 or so - check it out, it's fun!
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate to break it to you but with a very small number of exceptions, every game released in the last 10 years locks you down to a propriatory platform. I can't see this trend changing for the next couple of years at least.
This would be more news-worthy if there was going to be a Linux version - rather than there not being one.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:4, Insightful)
But that is how a minority becomes a majority. If no one takes a stand, then the issue will not be visible to others.
If we followed your mindset, we'd still think the world was flat.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:3, Funny)
The only way around halflife2 is another game using the havoc 2 engine.
Valve doesn't care about you? Think of it as a *really* hot chick wanting you to be something you're not. Usually you'd say screw that (no pun intended), but if the hotness is too big you'll end up in that janitors uniform going "quack, quack!".
It might be worth the humiliation.
Oh dear (Score:4, Insightful)
Whoever said the the Linux gaming scene was full of shit?
My plan is simple... (Score:5, Funny)
Aiming for the Market (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Aiming for the Market (Score:5, Insightful)
He says exactly what you said: no one will get rich, or even make a profit, selling Linux games (just check out Loki!). His angle is that since Linux gamers have really helped out on the dedicated server side with Half Life 1, maybe its time to expect Valve to return the favor a little. Most of the lastest-n-greatest games/engines have native Linux versions, so it is technically possible if you keep portability in mind (and isn't that just plain good programing?). Of all the big game producers, Valve is one of the few that do great FPS that don't have Linux ports.
I want to play HL2, and I will buy HL2, but I'm not going to buy it until a) WineX is reported to run it with no problems or b) there is a native Linux port. I will not use Windows for it. But that's just me. No skin off Valve's back if they don't get my money since I'm not their target market.
Re:Aiming for the Market (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Aiming for the Market (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. (Score:5, Interesting)
I swear it was like watching your dog get hit by a car as he returned from the pound.
Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. (Score:5, Interesting)
Reminds me of the Doom for OS/2 debacle back in the early-mid 90s. IBM contracted a developer to port Doom to OS/2. IBM demoed the game in action at some trade shows. A private beta version was eventually leaked to the Internet, but the finished game never saw the light of day.
Similar situation happened with Lemmings for OS/2. A developer was contracted by Sony/Psygnosis to do the port. The developer became active on comp.os.os2.games recruiting beta testers. Public betas were made available. The game worked perfectly with the 5 or 6 demo levels that were in the beta, and then suddenly everything disappeared.
I sometimes think that Linux users have forgotten that, for many of us, this sort of situation isn't new. I swore off Windows completely back in 1993, and saw this same sort of thing over, and over, and over, and over again. I'm seeing the same thing now with Linux (and, as you point out, it's often been an issue for Mac users as well).
I wish I had a solution (I wish I had a solution 8 years ago for that matter). I don't like the situation anymore than anyone else here does, but, as they say, it is what it is.
Yaz.
Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Sorry, sympathy meter's reading zero, dude. (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.gentoogames.com/ [gentoogames.com]
What about us Netware users? (Score:5, Funny)
One other thing, I have this Amiga....
Re:What about us Netware users? (Score:4, Insightful)
You run Linux. I run Linux. For the added beauty of this operating system, we have to make compromises. Right now, that is software (specifically game) support.
The answer is simply to continue to run Linux and continue to show others how wonderful this OS is.
We need numbers before companies will port all of their games to Linux. I can't blame them in the least, if I was the CEO of a gaming company, I wouldn't waste my time and effort porting something to Linux.
Unfortunately, the answer is not "MAKE THEM PORT GAMES SO MORE USERS WILL COME!!!??!?!"
The answer is, get more users. Once Linux has a significant share of the desktop community, the games will follow suit.
Re:What about us Netware users? (Score:5, Interesting)
So valve is familiar with how to write code for linux and they use it to make money. Bioware didn't but they did support linux, sure it took them time but they did it. Thanks.
So is it really that stupid to expect a company like Valve to give something back for all those linux machines that have helped make their game great?
Remember that the the cost of the engine, the bit that would need porting, is minor nowadays to the cost of creating the world, the art, wich doesn't need to be ported.
So the real problem the poster has is not that valve like the fast majority of game companies ignores linux. They made gratefull use of linux by running their game servers on it. Is it then really that odd to expect that they would this time also allow all those linux users who helped made their game great to be able to play it as well? It is not like the cost of porting is all that big. They know how to write for linux and considering it comes out on x-box they know how to port.
A reflection of the state of Linux in general (Score:5, Interesting)
Continue playing... (Score:3, Funny)
How do you think I should react? I mean, I could switch to Slash'Em, but don't you think that's a bit extreme?
Boot Windows (Score:5, Funny)
Let me get my wallhack... (Score:5, Funny)
Here we go... (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes its technically capable. Especially with modern nVidia drivers the way they are. But that's not the point.
The point is that you have to expend money, resources and time to make a Linux client. Why are you going to do that when 95% of your user base can/will use the Windows version anyway?
Besides community goodwill, there is no good reason for a developer to port a game to Linux and until there is a damn good reason for developers to port games to Linux, UT2K3 will remain the exception rather than the rule.
Re:Here we go... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mac version does not give you Linux (Score:3, Informative)
But I have to take issue with your "one that is considered the native API". This is complete tripe, and something that gets regurgitated by ex-NeXT executives at Apple that really should know better.
Cocoa and Carbon are both equally "native" - they both sit on top of th
Linux Game Market smaller than advocates believe (Score:3, Insightful)
Just to clarify and elaborate on your point, the 95% are Linux folk not Windows folk. Most Linux gamers dual boot or run Wine, they are already customers. A Linux port would not generate new money, it would merely replace a Win32 sale with a Linux sale. That's a loss from Valve's perspective, more work, no new money.
The
I won't be buying it (Score:3, Interesting)
If they do decide to port it, though, I will gladly give them some of my money. Sadly, I don't see that happening. I guess I'll just have to give it to id and Epic instead.
Re:I won't be buying it -- Won't help Linux (Score:3, Interesting)
I tried this a few years ago, I switched entirely to Linux on my home PC. Guess What? I had a bunch of nice Loki Games, but other than Quake 3 I could not deathmatch with my friends in games like Half Life.
That did not do me much good. So, I started looking into different ways to get Half Lif
directX (Score:4, Insightful)
DX9 beats the living pixels out of OpenGL, and that's just a simple fact.
I hate MS as much as the next slashdotter, but come on guys.
Windows has Linux beat hands down for gaming.
On another note, while freeBSD runs fine on my 500mhz via mini-itx board, I know I'm not the only person out there buying a whole new system for HL2 and Doom3 in the next few months. and guess what's going on the primary partition? It'll only get booted up to play games, web/e-mail can be done on anything.
Re:directX...never forget (Score:3, Insightful)
the bottom line (Score:5, Informative)
Valve has made steps to ensure that Half-Life works under WINE, but the reality is, they will continue to use DirectX, as they feel that is how they can make the best possible game. The money that would go into creating a Linux box would be prohibitively expensive, not to mention perhaps impossible because of patents/copyrights on DirectX technology.
It would be great if it worked under Linux, but the bottom line is it doesn't make economic sense.
Re:the bottom line (Score:4, Interesting)
They chose the easy and cheap way out... cancel the port
Half-Life 2 (Score:4, Funny)
HL for Mac. (Score:3, Informative)
hardly a suprise... considering nerve's heritage.. (Score:3, Informative)
they are already talking about making HL2 an xbox-exclusive title, locking out PS2 etc.
how friendly to linux do YOU think they could possibly be?
Why? (Score:3, Funny)
I have not the heart to tell you.
How will I react to the release of Half-Life 2? (Score:5, Insightful)
Strike two on Valve. (Score:5, Interesting)
What I don't fully understand is why Valve went with DX9 over CG and openGL, especially since DX9's HLSL is essentially identical to CG. CG offers cross-platform compatibility. DX9 limits the portability of HL2. So why do it?
The same way I reacted to Duke Nukem... (Score:5, Funny)
Um... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it doesn't. Just because you can run a server, which people connect to and run maps from, doesn't mean your server is actually "rendering" anything. It's loading data for your clients to read/write to, and its controlling the flow of that data. Linux does this much better than Windows, which is why the Linux server exists in the first place. No one would bother cooking up a dedicated server for it otherwise.
But Half-Life 2 is DX9 from the ground up. This means it uses extensions, functions, and rendering calls that are so deeply ingrained into windows, that you can NOT run the game any other way. This is where WineX and whatnot come into play, taking those same function calls and telling Linux how to use them.
Firstly, this type of translation is going to make any port of the game run slower, until the code is much faster than it will be in the first few WineX releases supporting it. Yes, I know how fast UT2003 can run in Linux. But have you seen the tech demos for HL2? It will be quite some time before we see that level of speed and clarity on a Linux system.
And, this sounds really pathetic, but their licensing agreements with Installshield may hold them back as well. From what I recall, this is the same thing that held up NWN from being released on Linux. The Windows registry can be a shit-filled bog, and the Installshield makes the game-makers lives that much easier. It sounds pitiful, but little stuff like that can hold up development.
And finally, Valve has busted their ass on Steam, and even though it stumbled out of the gate with their recent full-on release (who didn't see that coming), they put so much time and effort on a solid DRM release platform that to try and convert that to Linux, who by nature is a registry-less system, would be too much time and trouble for a company to put themselves through, let alone farm out the work at considerable cost.
In this dreamworld that the article-writer lives in, he forgets that game companies are under intense pressure to deliver perfect product all of the time. It is easier to leave it up to the community than to put serious time and resources into making the same thing available on both OSes.
And don't forget about DRM. We geeks chuckle at it, but the fact remains that as the years go on, and MS has its way (which it always does, eventually), between the Windows versions of iTunes and delivery mechanisms such as Steam, you'd be surprised at how this will begin to hold Linux back, in my opinion. DRM is awful, I agree, but everyone loves iTunes and what is it but a wolf in sheeps clothing (nice interface and high moral standing but really just DRM)?
Food for thought.
will never happen (Score:3, Insightful)
"DirectX 9.0 has been crucial in helping us create a worthy sequel to Half-Life, one that gives Windows gamers everything they've been waiting for, a truly unequaled experience," said Gabe Newell, cofounder of Valve. "We are thrilled that our relationship with Microsoft has produced a title that all of us can be proud of."
Half Life 2 - An OS/2 Users Lament. (Score:4, Interesting)
Welcome to earth. Nice to have you here.
This has been an issue in computing for the last decade: PC game companies write games for Windows. That's the way it was, that's the way it is, and unless something drastic happens, that's the way it's always going to be. Gamers use Windows because it's the platform the majority of PC games are on, and PC game companies target Windows because that's where the vast majority of their audience is.
This isn't a Linux-specific issue either. As an OS/2 user for the last 12 years (and Linux user for the past 4 or 5), I've seen it first hand. The only thing that will potientiall change the situation is if the game companies either see a huge decrease in the sales of their Windows titles, or feel there is sufficiently pent-up demand for Linux-based titles.
Personally, I don't see that happening anytime soon. My advice to you is to do what I did -- leave your PC for serious work, and go out and buy a PlayStation 2, a good TV, and a surround sound system. Add in the network adapter and the PS2 Linux kit, and you have a kick-ass game system, DVD player, and Linux box all in one nice black box, leaving your PCs available for more serious computing tasks.
Yaz.
ohhhhh... (Score:5, Funny)
DirectX is the proprietary problem (as usual) (Score:5, Interesting)
The stupid thing is, they couldn't even just say they would code pure DirectX 9, because Nvidia in their wisdom decided to implement DirectX 9 in their own proprietary way, thus leading to the current public spat with Valve saying they had to code separate paths to have Nvidia hardware work with the game anyway!!
It really is time that a game protocol is made that is truly able to be used as a cross-platform API. I mean, game developers must surely realise that if they were able to code in one API and have it compile under Windows, Linux, Xbox, PS2, GameCube etc, they would make way more money servicing all the market segments, not just one, and save on development costs to boot!
OpenGL 2 is touted as being all that DirectX 9 is and more, plus it is an open protocol, but game developers need to use it and help formulate it for it to be a success.
I use Windows because of the games. That's the ONLY reason. Linux is more than capable of being my primary OS for web browsing, email, office work etc. But without developers coding for Linux, it will never gain the crucial support of the younger generation whose first question will be "What games run on it?" And if you don't hook 'em while they're young, then you will lose another generation to Microsoft's grasp.
ATI and Nvidia both supply 3D drivers for their cards, so why aren't they trying to get developers on board to actually code or port GAMES for the Linux market???
Someone really needs to write a GameOS version of Linux, and basically give it away as open source. If one or two top games like Half Life 2 or Doom III were able to run on it, it would soon saturate the market and provide developers with a free alternative to developing purely for Microsoft. Heck, why doesn't Sun write it? It could be a whole new line for them and firmly establish them as a true competitor to Microsoft. Just make it an open source game protocol is all I ask.
Re:DirectX is the proprietary problem (as usual) (Score:4, Insightful)
And surely you realize that such an abstraction will either require significant architectural concessions from all platforms, or will inevitably lead to slower performance on all platforms. Its called optimization, and it is almost always the enemy of generalization.
Why there's no client (Score:3, Insightful)
1: The dedicated server is simpler and easier to port because most of the source remains unchanged and you don't have to fuss with OS-specific API's and graphics libraries beyond the very rudimentary GUI
2: Linux is sucessful in the realm of servers, but is not yet a mainstream primary desktop operating system. Sure, maybe there are 10% as many linux desktop installs as windows, but the vast majority of those linux users also have a windows partition or another computer running windows, therefore it's not worth porting the client to take advantage of an extra 1% of market space.
dual-boot (Score:4, Insightful)
What?! HL2 won't run on my toaster with netbsd?! (Score:4, Insightful)
So here's a typical slashdot response. I mean, just because it runs on Windows and not linux, you have a bajillion people calling shenanigans on Valve. I didn't hear nearly as many complaints when Nintendo released Legend of Zelda for the Gamecube only. And the same can be said for any third-party-developer game released for a single platform, so don't say that's a bad analogy.
And of course, for those people who say that it's the same hardware, so it should be easy, well, just look at how long it took to get WINE working. It's not easy. It's essentially developing for a different platform even if the hardware is the same.
So before you get all self-righteous about this, just stop and think for a second. If you're about to whine because Valve won't support your platform of choice, just remember that you made a choice. No one's forcing you to use linux. No one but you. And quit saying that Valve is in bed with Microsoft. It sure seems that they've been pretty linux friendly, compared to say... ohh. I don't know. Blizzard. And pretty much everyone else out there. Sure there are some exceptions, but in the end, they're about making money, and yes, you hate that, but many of you live in America, and enjoy doing so, what with the whole democracy and capitalism thing going on, imperfect though our implementation may be. Like the subject says, this is like whining about it not running on your toaster with netbsd. So. Yeah. Stop it.
Kiss future EpicGames Linux titles goodbye. (Score:3, Interesting)
Future game hacks may stop WINE support (Score:3, Interesting)
Since WINE sports Hardware acceleration, future game hacks (e.g. a program that aims for you, and other cheats) that are developed to run and hack through WINE, might be undetectable for the Windows anti-cheat program. Thus, it might be that the Anti-Cheat will block any WINE.
I've allready seen cheats that is undetectable through WINE in Half-Life Counter-Strike, and my guess it's only a matter of time before WINE is getting blocked, unless a anti-cheat client from within Linux is written.
Here we go again. (Score:5, Insightful)
Go back and look over this story [slashdot.org]. There, one before, we had a story on Slashdot about a software vendor not supporting Linux. At that time, I made a very reasonable suggestion - write to the company involved and ask for a Linux port. I also asked folks who had done so to comment in my Journal, so as to have a public record of the number of letters so written so that when the company involved said "We've never had any requests for this" we could trivially disprove the claim.
And what came of it? Nothing. cat
Why did Valve release a Linux server for Halflife? Because the community innundated them with requests for it.
So you want a HalfLife2 for Linux? Innundate Valve with requests! Stop bitching on Slashdot, and write them a physical, paper and toner letter requesting a HalfLife2 client for Linux.
Now, as for the whole "Just suck it up and run Windows" crowd, and the whole "Fuck Windows - Linux or Nothing" crowd: Each of us must make a decision what is more important - running the OS we choose, or playing a game. And you know what? That decision is going to be different for different people - imagine that!
If you are willing to put up with Windows to be able to run Halflife 2, then by all means do so, have fun, and SHUT THE FUCK UP!
If you will 'live free or die', and refuse to run Windows in order to run Halflife 2, then great! Welcome to the fold, accept the consequences of your decision, and SHUT THE FUCK UP (on Slashdot, that is)! Bitching on Slashdot won't change things, writing a letter to Valve just might!
Or if you don't want to write Valve, then help out on the Wine DirectX layer (and yes, I actually DO have contributions in the Wine source tree.)
But whatever your choices are, accept that they come with consequences, and STOP BITCHING ABOUT THEM WHERE IT WILL DO NO GOOD!
Boycott (Score:3, Interesting)
Turn Off your Half Life Linux Server (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:MS does good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:MS does good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:MS does good (Score:5, Insightful)
Then again, this article does talk about the state of Linux gaming. Which is slim right now. But then again, look at the user base.
It is a tough argument to make. On one hand you have the masses that will buy your games no problem. On the other hand you have this small, but VERY thankful group who will not forget the fact that you put out a game for them (or that you didn't).
But I still have to go back to the fact that if you really really want to play latest games, have a Windows partition so that you can boot to just for that. Compatibility will never be an issue.
RonB
Re:We just write our own! (Score:3, Funny)
According to Joe Lieberman (and obviously others), if you play an FPS for the killing virtual people you have much bigger problems.
Re:Linux uses don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh darn... wait, you mean something like this [libsdl.org]? Well, if you don't like that, how about this one [clanlib.org]? Oh, I see... you forgot to do any research before you made you groundless claim.
"Linux 7.2", huh? Thanks for proving my point that you don't know wtf you're talking about. "Interesting" my ass.
Re:Linux uses don't get it. (Score:3, Insightful)
Parent poster complains about the number of differing libraries to develop under and wants ONE set of API's.
You respond by giving him *two* libraries to use.
Way to miss the point there, fella
Re:Linux uses don't get it. (Score:4, Interesting)
SDL is nice, and so are a lot of other freeware graphics/audio libraries, but most every developer will tell you they still don't stand up to the massive suite of DirectX technologies. You've probably never even bothered with a DirectX app or an SDL app. I have done both.
None are equivalent to the speed and power of DirectX. Hate Microsoft all you want, but that's just something you have to cede at this point in time. Why don't YOU do "research" before spouting off and insulting people for giving their opinions on the poor state of Linux gaming development?
Re: Linux uses don't get it. (Score:4, Insightful)
> When linux comes out with a directx equivelent then they might write for it ( this is ONE set of API's ) . Not opengl doesn't count, that is only graphics.
> You need sound,graphics,networking,AND graphics card writers writing to those drivers. That is what makes windows such a good gaming platform. Linux needs to consolidate and throw away the 4 graphics libraries and the 3 different sound package and the 60 windowing library packages and get down to one standard that EVERYONE uses.
Sounds like a recipe for SDL [libsdl.org].