Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Linux Unreal Tournament Files Released 186

Posted by Hemos from the go-and-can't-them dept.
Iceweasel writes "BTW, since Unreal Tournament came out today (and trust me, I already have my copy :), the Linux UT files were released today. Go to www.fileplanet.com or unreal.epicgames.com to get the 3 MB download. " Thanks to all the people who e-mailed me about GT Interactive - click below to get Tim Sweeney's take on the whole deal.

[Hi, I just posted this info in the Slashdot forum elaborating on why we didn't ship the Linux executables in the Unreal Tournament box.]

The UT Linux executables will be available for download rather than being included in the box.

We don't like this either. We REALLY, REALLY wanted the Linux executables to be on the CD, we reserved space for it, and actually had it there in the directory structure during beta.

GT asked us yank it, because they were worried about tech support issues: that thousands of Linux users would have questions about installation that GT reps (who are only familiar with Windows and consoles) wouldn't be able to answer.

We obliged with their request, because GT is responsible for performing (and paying for) UT tech support, and it didn't seem fair to put the burden on them.

Here is part of a message I sent to a GT exec, advocating putting Linux on the UT CD-Rom:

---begin---

Why Linux on the Unreal Tournament box is a very good move:

First, Red Hat Linux is selling very well in retail, and there's a good chance that by word of mouth, Linux users will pick up Unreal Tournament with their Linux purchase or afterwards. I'd be very surprised if we didn't gain over 3% more sales from Linux users. Now if UT sells a million units (Tim's wild guess), that's 30,000 additional units. If we make it *very* clear that the Linux version is unsupported (no tech support calls), then surely this is a profitable move.

Second, while Linux users are far outnumbered by Windows users, the statistics don't tell the whole story. Linux users are the hardest of the hardcore. They're among the movers and shakers who are serious deathmatchers (Quake 2 and Quake 3 are available for Linux); they run major community web sites; they run servers on T1 and T3 connections. These people have far more influence on gaming than their numbers indicate.

Third, Linux is gaining an incredible amount of momentum, and sticking the Linux penguin logo on the UT box would further the Unreal franchise's position as a leading-edge product that's not afraid to push into new territories. This has always been our hallmark -- Epic shipped the first-ever DirectX game (Fire Fight, published by Electronic Arts); now the Unreal Tournament demo is the first DirectX7 release; and now we have the chance to be the first game to ship simultaneous with Windows and Linux versions in the same box.

---end---

GT considered all of this and understood the issues, but still had overriding concerns about the cost.

I can't say I blame them; I sure wouldn't want to be responsible for supporting users with 10 different versions each of 10 different Linux distributions, each with a completely different set of video drivers, x-windows shells, permissions, and possibly even recompiled kernels. Linux's approach kicks ass on the Internet with its open, user-driven community. But it doesn't seem too compatible with the mass-market distribution model, where companies pay rooms full of people to answer phones and help customers, and where one tech support call wipes out all the profit from a box sold.

Emailing companies like GT *politely* to show your support for the Linux platform is a great idea. Just keep in mind that, to publishers, the Linux thing isn't simply a popularity contest; supporting Linux needs to make sense financially, and there are some serious issues with support and compatibility they need to consider.

Tim Sweeney
Epic Games
http://unreal.epicgames.com/

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux Unreal Tournament Files Released More

Linux Unreal Tournament Files Released

Comments Filter:
  • As cool as it is on Windows, it will be better on my home machine. Gonna get them DL'ed as I walk in the door.

  • Question... (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    So.. Why didn't they try for BeOS support? They said they would do it if they had enough BeOS user feedback. It made all the BeOS news sites. I can't imagine they didn't get any feedback. There's a lot of us out here.

    But instead they just didn't do it in favor of a Linux release. If anything GT would probably have been more open to the idea of BeOS since all they had to support was one distribution, etc, etc, etc. In fact even less variations and problems than Windows would run into.

    So why not try for BeOS? Why hasn't Epic released a BeOS version like this Linux one? What the hell is wrong with BeOS, anyway? Everyone wants to ignore it in favor of the popular Linux. Come on.. This is one thing BeOS has over Linux--it's proprietry. Many people seem to think that's a fault. When it comes to the rest of the software world, being closed is the next best thing to Windows. So why doesn't anyone want to support it?

  • Perhaps its time to get a new distributor (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    If GT Interactive didn't want to play, then perhaps it's time to find a new distributor.

    It's not only the consumers who get to vote with their feet - but the producers as well.

  • Not before, def. not now. (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I didn't buy quake2 until it was in a box for Linux. What makes you think that I'm going to buy your product now.

    If I buy your windows product and then download the linux bins, then I'm supporting GT's linux ignorance. No thanks.
  • Here's my take on BEos, like it or not.
    It's way too expensive, and it's new and unfamiliar to everyone. If they had a downloadable crippled version it'd get more exposure, more interest, and more users. They act like it's ready for the open market and a commercial release. Whatever. I saw it at Best Buy for $80, comes with a thick book. Why not sell it for $35 for awhile? Why not advertise and get noticed at trade shows? That company just confuses the @^@# outta me.
  • Fileplanet, unreal.epicgames.com and Slashdot are being a little misleading.

    Perhaps these articles should specify that only Linux/i386 binaries have been released. Remember, when you just say "Linux" you are implying more than just Intel.
  • They could sell a product with a liscensing agreement that says it might not work, if it doesn't work its not their fault, and if it eats all your data and starts a global thermonuclear war, thats not their fault either


    Oh wait, thats EULA!

    Seriously though, it would be nice if they could toss the linux exes on the cd, and a penguin logo on the box and a pamphlet in the box that says
    ATTENTION: WE DO NOT SUPPORT THE LINUX VERSION, SO DON'T CALL US ABOUT IT.

  • It's all numbers (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The largest market in terms of raw eyeballs is Windows - so you gotta support that.

    The largest market in terms of growth is Linux. It makes sense to support that.

    BeOS is not large in terms of existing eyeballs, nor is it likely to grow much. Especially as once people convert to Linux, they tend to stay converted.

    One could make an argument that BeOS is merely a rest stop on the way to Linux.

    Hell, even the Mac guys - who vastly outnumber the BeOS guys - are having trouble getting stuff ported, even when the iMac sold like hotcakes. Who in their right mind would port to an even smaller niche than that?

    I feel kinda bad for BeOS folks. They get to experience all the frustrations owning an Amiga once caused, without ever getting to experience the heyday the Amiga once had, circa '89.

    Bottom line - BeOS is an evolutionary dead end rapidly running out of habitat.

  • Linux-specific parts of UT to be open sourced (Score:3)

    by Azog ( 20907 ) on Tuesday November 23, 1999 @10:15AM (#1509592) Homepage
    The Linux-specific parts of Unreal Tournament will be open sourced. (Credit to Blue's News [bluesnews.com] where I saw this - I thought it would be relevant here.)

    From Brandon "GreenMarine" Reinhart's .plan:


    I have permission from Tim to open source certain parts of the engine for the purposes of improving Linux support. What I would like to do is make available the code I have written for Glide, Mesa, input, and audio. I would appreciate Linux programmers taking the time to submit improvements to me at brandon@epicgames.com. I will look into putting up a webpage for this and perhaps a discussion forum. Please email me your input or ideas.

    I'm leaving to go home for Thanksgiving tomorrow, so I may not be able to start on this until I get back on Friday. Right now I'm working on the Mesa renderer, because I would like to release that soon, if possible.

    The code that I open source will not allow you to really dig very deep into the engine, but it will let you do a lot of stuff to the renderer and X windows interface.

    Since my time is split between non-Linux related projects, the Linux port could no doubt be improved if it gets some attention from experienced Linux programmers.



    This is excellent - it might also help other people porting games to Linux. An obvious question is, what open source license? The released code will have to be linked against the proprietary game engine. So I guess the GPL wouldn't work, right?

    Azog
  • Brandon Reinhart claims portions of the Linux UT source will be released:

    I have permission from Tim to open source certain parts of the engine for the purposes of improving Linux support. What I would like to do is make available the code I have written for Glide, Mesa, input, and audio. I would appreciate Linux programmers taking the time to submit improvements to me at brandon@epicgames.com. I will look into putting up a webpage for this and perhaps a discussion forum. Please email me your input or ideas.

    I'm leaving to go home for Thanksgiving tomorrow, so I may not be able to start on this until I get back on Friday. Right now I'm working on the Mesa renderer, because I would like to release that soon, if possible.

    The code that I open source will not allow you to really dig very deep into the engine, but it will let you do a lot of stuff to the renderer and X windows interface.

    Since my time is split between non-Linux related projects, the Linux port could no doubt be improved if it gets some attention from experienced Linux programmers.


  • Although i am disappointed in GT's failure to put the linux executables in the box, they do have a point...as it stands now, (although this will most likely change soon), it *can be* somewhat tricky for the novice user to get things up and running properly on a linux box, and altho the proposed warning about no tech support for the linux version is a good idea, people are generally bad at reading warnings, etc, and the GT tech support would prob still be hit with a flood of tech support calls...just my opinion tho

  • I love seeing more games come out for linux. Right now I use windows for that reason alone. I would much rather use something else, however I can do everything I want internet related on windows, Is there a complete linux browser out there? while I dont know of one I am shure there are word processors and other such apps for linux, but the main reason I stick with windows is to play various games. Fortunately, if this trend continues I will finally have reason enough to junk gates's crap and run something better. And so will many others.
  • when will GT ship UT in Europe? is there a possibility that they sell the european version with linux binaries? that'd be cool.

    alex
  • GT could have been another Loki. If they had released Linux binaries in the same box as Windows versions, they may well see increased sales, and through possible feedback, would see that Linux would have a modest usage.

    GT, seeing there is a market, albiet, small, would be encouraged to release more linux games. A la Loki.

    If Loki can survive on Linux games, then other companies can as well. All the software houses moving into Linux software, being applications or games, will likely see profitability while Linux is growing fast. This is the time to establish yourself in a linux market, not two years down the road when its common practice.

    Also, such companies will gain respect (if they release good software, not duff), as Loki have found. Respect from consumers means > sales > money.

    It does need companies to take a risk, if the risk pays off, companies will do well. Linux has been growing for too long (year plus) for interest to suddenly die away. If linux was a fad, Linux would have faded away by now.

    Also, people will see more Linux games on the shelves, and will see linux as a mainstream OS where you can do wordprocessing etc, and also, play games.. The linux image of geeks, and nerds will disappear, which will encourage "non-techies" to try linux out.

  • If I buy your windows product and then download the linux bins, then I'm supporting GT's linux ignorance. No thanks.

    If you read Tim Sweeney's letter and comments posted below the headline, you'd know that it's not exactly "ignorance" on GT's part not to package the Linux binaries on the CD. I would have loved to have seen them put the Linux version on there myself, but like Tim said, GT would be taking a financial risk in doing this. GT's main goal is making a profit, just like every other company, and they stood to lose more money on tech support calls than they would gain from the added sales to Linux users.

    Reading what Tim said, it's at least a step in the right dirrection. With people like Tim and John Carmack are doing in the game industry and with the ever increasing software/hardware support Linux is getting, we'll be seeing many more mainstream games come out with boxed Linux versions. Carmack said it himself when he talked about how other game developers and producers will be watching the sales of Q3A for Linux to decided whether or not it's worth it for them to go that route with their games. Right now they're all letting Id take the first big step and watching to see if works out. IMO, had Unreal Tournament come out after Q3A for Linux had been in stores for a month or more and the sales had proven to be good, I'm sure GT would have taken Tim Sweeney's advice. Until then we're just gonna have to wait and see. Companies will start jumping on the Linux bandwagon once a major game sells well. We can all do our parts by buying the Linux Q3A when it comes out, but until then, we'll just have to keep waiting.

    Sub-Zero

  • Give the guys some slack, okay? (Score:3)

    by tenth ( 62935 ) on Tuesday November 23, 1999 @10:36AM (#1509602) Homepage
    Seriously now, it's fun to be angry at people for "repressing" Linux versions of popular software, but honestly, how many game manufacturers bother to port to Linux at all in the first place? (Not counting Loki games, which are ported after the fact by another {albeit very cool} company.)

    We need to remember that Linux is still a New Thing(tm) to a lot of management people, and if the first few companies that experiment with providing a Linux version get a lot of angry emails from people demanding a box with a penguin on it (Or any more rallying cries of "You've lost yourself another sale", no offense), it certainly won't help to encourage other people to port to Linux.

    It's a good game (a lot prettier than Q3, imho, and a hell of a lot easier to get running on a Voodoo 3) and if you want it, and want to support game companies who release Linux versions of their software, be a good penguin p1mp and just buy it, download the executable, and send a friendly email and/or registration card to the company with your opinions regarding the packaging.

    If we're not mean to them, maybe they won't be afraid to put it in the box next time. ;-)

  • 3MB? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    the only files I see are the 49 MB full installs. Can I get just the Linux executables and reuse my win maps/pak files?
  • The more top-tier titles that are available for Linux, the better. Think about it this way: the most-played commercial title for Linux is undoubtedly Quake. Unreal is another top-shelf first person shooter. How long before companies producing titles in other genres say, "Hmm...id and Epic, for the most part, _own_ the [rapidly expanding] Linux market...we need to get a piece of the action!"

    This is when you will see Linux executables in the same box as the Windows version. Epic releasing the executables for Linux (and open-sourcing parts of them) is a significant step towards this goal.

  • 3D under Linux is presently poor... (Score:3)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 23, 1999 @10:43AM (#1509606)

    I'm not thrilled with lack of Linux support in the box, but I understand it;

    3D acclerator support under Linux is not good. It's getting better - but setting it up is a real pain and yeilds inconsistant results from program to program. I wouldn't want to support any Linux 3D-aware program till XFree v.4 with improved 3D and DRI support is released.

    Lack of in-the-box Linux support won't prevent me from buying Unreal Tournament one bit...but I have to admit that Quake III Arena is ahead of UT on my shopping list. If UT did have Linux support in the box, I might have picked it up out of curiosity and to show support for future games. As of now, I'll wait till I use Q3A for a while and see if I want another FPS.

  • GT doesn't need to be another Loki. GT is a huge company, vastly larger than Loki. Probably larger than Loki will ever be. Even when they lose money in a quarter, they are still more than Loki.

    -sw
  • According to JLG there's about 100k of us. I just don't think that's enough of a user-base to justify the cost of the port. I'm not sure you could count on even 1 in 10 of that 100k buying the game. Also, hw accelerated 3d isn't all there yet. Next year, things will be different!

    -beme
  • #define IANAL TRUE

    Well, if THAT were true, you couldn't use GNU's software on anything but Linux, since you have to link against a non-GPLed (or LPGLed) C library for it to work.

    On the other hand, the executable depends on libUT.so (or whatever it would be called), so it would probably violate the spirit of the GPL.

    Rememeber, the GPL forbids using GPLed code in proprietary applications, not necessarily the other way around.

    FWIW, this is majorly cool, unless you're an average Joe who doesn't give a rat's ass about C code in general and just want to frag people.

    If you do care, OTOH, you'll be able to produce all kinds of new clients...

    mmm... multihead... GGI...
  • Marking this post down as flaimbait was a little harsh. Perhaps "overrated" would have been more appropriate, if one feels that BeOS fans are disproportionately upgrading the article's rating, but I really don't think the poster was trying to do anything but ask a question and make a polite request that their favorite OS get supported.

    I agree with others that BeOS suffers from many of the disadvantages of other proprietary OSes. It is terribly vulnerable to orphaning should Be go under, it is pricy, it is much less polished in many respects than Linux, etc. etc. Still, it does do some things very nicely and, if nothing else, is a fun toy to play around with.

    In any case, while I don't agree with the idea that BeOS should be getting support prior to Linux, I don't think the poster deserves getting nuked as "flaimbait," even though I do happen to agree with the resulting +1 score (but that may just be my pro-Linux bias speaking as much as anything).
  • Well, technically the complaints are invalid. However, Epic Megagames did a poor job by only releasing the 3dfx renderer. If they had released the 3dfx, OpenGL/Mesa, and software renderers (and it seems they will NOT release the software renderer from the README), then there would be at least a chance to play Unreal Tournament on PowerPC, albeit in the perfectly functional, but ugly, software mode.

    So, yes, there should be complaints from all LinuxPPC users, as well as the Alpha users, all 100 of them. <j/k>

  • Unbelievably childish reaction. (Score:3)

    by TREMOR ( 25105 ) on Tuesday November 23, 1999 @11:20AM (#1509620) Homepage
    To all of you that say you won't buy this game because there are no executables on the CD, I say this to you: You are being unbelievably childish. I have been preaching to all my friends that the day is coming, Linux (oh, sorry, that would be x86 Linux for those complaining about this little tidbit) will be the only OS on my drive when the games get here. Well guess what? The games are coming? Did you relinquish Quake 1 and 2 to the unwanted rubbish bin BEFORE id so graciously put out a CD with the Linux executables? Looking at the server stats, I don't think so. So what's different with UT?

    Given the fact that they took the TIME to make a port for Linux, you should be gratefull, not petty. EPIC should not be made to suffer because of GT's decision. The files are AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW. Get them. Use them. Enjoy the game. If you punish Epic over this, not only will they not port again, but you are being the most vocal opponent of gaming on Linux. With every comment of "I won't buy it because of blah blah blah" you show the management of the distribution companies that you are an all or nothing group, and therefore all Linux users must be the same. Kiss any future support goodbye.

    I bought the game today. I downloaded the files today. I WILL play it on Linux tonight. So sit on your high and mighty moral high ground if you will, but I'll be playing.

    God forbid if Microsoft ever releases any software for Linux...
  • Have you seen the RT2 demo? Just detar it, cd to ./rt2_demo and type ./rt2. It's equally as easy with the myth2 demo and the Civ:CTP shrinkwrap edition.
  • I downloaded the executable last night to read the README to see if they had got support for Mesa in. This would have enabled me to play it under my tnt with hardware acceleration ( well, a tiny bit of hw acceleration ) a long with other people running g200s and g400s etc. It said he's still planning to support it and it still only supports 3dfx. Oh well, I'll just wait a while till that happens.
  • The support issue simply does not make sense.

    They could have included an "limited support" binary, which the only support would be FAQ's and linux-techsupport@...

    Sure some linux newbies may still harrass the 1800 lines or the main tech support, but what is preventing people from harassing them NOW about downloading/installing/running the Linux binary?

  • Not buying the game is not sending a positive message to anyone. In a few months the numbers will only indicate that the game didn't sell well, not why. Also not buying the game isn't just punishing GT (the distributor) it's also punishing Epic (the developers). But Epic is the company that is spending time and money to port their game to Linux. Why punish them?

    So the better solution is to send a positive message to Epic by buying their game. But before you even open it, sit down and write an intelligent email to GT explaining that are dissapointed with them, and that you want the linux version in the box next time. Then download the Linux binaries from Epic's site (which informs them too, that you want Linux). This way everyone get's a pro Linux takehome message.

  • That is exactly why giving away tech support is a bad idea in the first place. They should charge for tech support from the get-go. Then they could charge a lower price, make more profit, and penalize the users who have wierd system configurations or aren't capable of getting it working, or just like to call tech support and harass them.

    Think about it..
    what percentage of users actually need tech support?
    How many of those are lamers who do stupid stuff?
    How many of those are people who just didn't read the manual?
    How many of those are people who insisted on installing "Game blaster game acceleration software" or "registry tuning software" and so fscked up their machine that it won't work?
    That probably covers most of them, and if a couple of innocents have to pay.. oh well. They will have paid less for the boxed software in the first place, it will probably about balance out.

    I think it would be a much better "value-add" than free tech support to *supply* a stripped down linux distribution that they can install that definitely will work with the game software.. heck that might solve a lot of windows users problems anyway.


    I think this represents a much better economic model (of course I think the software should be free too, but I realize that can be difficult to apply in the gaming world). But I wouldn't expect GT or anyone else to think that "out of the box"... uk uk.. pun intended.

  • The Demo is great (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I was so impressed with the demo that I ordered the full version. It's really good to see that a Linux version is available for download so soon. Now if there was only something in the works for that other great alternate OS I'd be really happy. The GT Interactive decision not to include a Linux version because of support issues seems reasonable. Dollar costs aside, there aren't a lot of Linux trained people available to fill job positions. My 00.02$
  • Let me rehash my question that I already asked about Q3...

    How does the Linux version of UT compare to the Windows when running on the same hardware?

    ------------------
  • Your own statement answers your question. They chose not port to BeOS because they didn't get "enough BeOS user feedback". IIRC, there are only approximately 100k BeOS users. There are over 100 million Windows users and an estimated 7 million Linux users. Epic was willing to make a Linux port to support what in their opinion are the hardcore players, the server admins and a viable market that justifies the expense of porting the game.

    Companies do not want to support an operating system with a tiny user base.
  • I really don't see what the fuss is about at all. So you have to download the Linux support as an optional extra. Woohoo, big deal.

    If you think about it, this turns out to be better for the Linux users. If the Linux version were packaged with the Windows version, there would never be any figures on how many Linux users actually bought the game, so noone would ever know if porting to Linux had been worth the effort or not.

    This way, Linux users have a chance to show their presence. I say buy the game. Download the Linux conversion. Slashdot the FTP server.

    The game rocks, it beats Quake 3 hands down IMHO, and when the reports start rolling in of the FTP server melting under the demand from Linux users, game programmers and distributors will know how many copies of the game ended up in the hands of Linux users (legally, please), and maybe they'll consider upping their support of the OS.
  • UT's performance should be fundamentally the same as q3 performance across OS's on the same hardware. I know for a fact that NVIDIA's X drivers are significantly slower than their windows drivers, but that may be fixed by the time the next major release of X comes around. 3dfx cards might be faster if they don't go through x, but use glide straight, without having to convert gl to glide.

  • Lets get together, and do the right thing. (Score:5)

    by Mr. Flibble ( 12943 ) on Tuesday November 23, 1999 @11:57AM (#1509639) Homepage
    I see a few comments here advocating "pirating" Unreal Tournament because the Linux binaries have not been included. This is not smart. For those of you who are planning this, I ask you to read the Linux-Advocacy-How-To.

    I for one am quite grateful to the guys for making the effort to have a Linux port. If you want to play the game under Linux? Buy the game, but make certain you fill out and mail in the registration card! On that card of course, indicate proudly that you purchased the game for Linux, the suits will notice this.

    Every copy that you "liberate for the Linux cause" (Pah!) and pirate reduces one registration card. Emailing GT (In a constructive manner!) is good, but paying for the game and making it known that you are using the Linux version is the best course of action that we have.

    GT is a company, it is their job to make money. If we can show them that they can make money off of Linux products they will change. I must admit that Quake 3 Arena is higher on my want list than Unreal Tournament, but I shall buy them both.

    Its simple recursion: The more Linux stuff you buy the more there is too buy. The more Linux stuff you buy the more there is to buy.........
  • Certainly, that would have to be considered by any business if there was a chance to find a publisher as good as or better than GT Interactive who would agree to support Linux.

    However, the ability to have Linux support in the box has to be weighed against the existing good relationship Epic Megagames has with GT Interactive. GT Interactive is a well-established publisher, with all the attendant resources. In the eyes of many Slashdot readers, the ability to put a penguin logo on the box might be a more important concern than having a publisher with the ability to distribute in mass-market quantities, world-wide and at a competitive price. However, Epic Megagames also has a duty to its Windows user base (the over 90% of sales from Mr Sweeney's figures). These users might not be as "enlightened" as Linux users, but they are the major source of value for Epic Megagames and the publisher. If there has to be a trade-off between having Tux on the box and making sure Unreal Tournament gets to a million people worldwide in a timely manner and through careful marketing, the latter must win due to financial concerns.

    Remember, even though the Linux version is not in the box, its only a 3MB download. At least we have it.
  • ... or has the whole Unreal thing lost all novelty now that everyone actually powerful enough hardware to run it? :o)
  • That analogy doesn't really work at all. In the UT case, buying the box lets you run it just fine on linux. In the table/chair analogy, you can't get a chair out of a table. If the analogy were more correct, it would be "I went to a store that sells tables with a detachable back that you can put on it to have it function as a chair. I have to send away for the attachment, which is free. Even so, I refused to buy the table because they didn't provide the back right away." Even that analogy is weak, because it would cost more to provide a physical alternative than just some space on a cd. It's better to buy the game (if you like it) and email gt saying you'd like to see linux binaries included in the future, and that you're a happy linux user.

    Or something.
  • Uh, it is kind of difficult to fix a closed source program. If they would have just coded the thing to OpenGL then we wouldn't have this problem. So those of us without Voodoo graphics cards will have to wait till it is put in.

    Hopefully releasing some of the Linux code will speed up the process.
  • "mean to them"? What is that supposed to mean (no pun intended)? I don't understand why some people here seem to equate a refusal to purchase UT as some sort of cruel punishment against GT and Epic. It can't be any further from the truth. You might as well say that Pepsi drinkers are cruelly punishing the Coca-Cola bottlers by not buying Coke

    No, no, no. Not buying their game is nice, relatively.

    I think what he refers to is such behavior as: Mail bombing customer support staff e-mail; sending off nasty letters; badmouthing the company in every venue; starting boycott campaigns; and generally being vehemently nasty and venemous about the box not displaying a penguin.

  • Yes. . .sorry about that *shamed*

  • Part opensource beats needing reverse engineering (Score:3)

    by poopie ( 35416 ) on Tuesday November 23, 1999 @12:10PM (#1509647) Journal
    While I agree with the statement that opensource FRAGMENTS generally don't encourage the participation of outside developers and doesn't contribute back USEFUL NEW REUSABLE CODE, it is nice nonetheless because it allows us to fix, optimize, extend, and enhance UT.

    Do you remember how much work everyone went through to reverse-engineer the doom wad formats? and then to write the various frontends? How many doom players *didn't* use some 3rd party frontend, level editor, etc...

    Having the linux parts opensourced *DOES* give developers a lot more info FOR DEVELOPING ENHANCEMENTS TO UT . It doesn't give much to people who are trying to rip off UT and use it's game engine all that much tho.

    The developers do have a right to profit from and protect their coding efforts. I don't deny them that at all. I'm happy that they're allowing us to tinker with the linux parts so that eventually we'll all have lots of great enhancements for UT that don't run under Windows.

    When epic sees development and enhancement being driven by LINUX users of UT, they'll have a harder time justifying not fully supporting it (including training their support staff in linux!)
  • I've been running the demo for a while on my Linux box at work (which has very similar hardware to my other-OS box at home). It's a little slower on Linux, but it seems (to me, at least) that most of the problems are in the input handling code rather than the rendering code. It's certainly quite playable on a decent machine with a Voodoo2 under Linux.
  • 1. Game publishers would not lower the cost of the retail software.

    2. Games are already buggy enough, do we really need to give them less motivation to create a decent product? It seems that buggy product doesn't have much impact on sales.

  • I'd think they'd get fewer tech support calls. After all, to install UT under Linux, you pretty much have to have installed Linux yourself. (Likely the case for 99% of Linux users today.) While you can install Windows without know what the hell you are doing, it is pretty hard to get a working Linux system up without learning something. One thing they won't get from the Linux version is calls from the sort of luser who asks about the broken cupholder. Those account for an ungodly percentage of most help-desk calls.
  • Well, I tried the UT LINUX Demo in the past. The problem I found---no X11 DGA mouse support. It will probably be supported in the future though. A smooth mouse is key to a good fps.

  • One of the main reasons Linux/Open Source Software is so lauded is because of the extensive Internet-based support available for it via mailing lists and IRC. Perhaps it would be better for them to adopt this kind of support model for their games. Hire some people, get them familiar with the Linux version of the game, and let them loose on IRC. Encourage community support from other users.

    You'd still need to make it clear that phone support isn't available, but it's probably better than no support at all. Even just providing a support forum where people can ask other users questions (without having to hire anybody to give official answers) would be better than no support at all.

  • FWIW, I plan to d/l the Linux binaries from a few different IP addresses in order to:

    1. Up their log stats and hopefully promote actual Linux "releases."
    2. Make up the shortfall due to whiney gits who won't d/l.

    Of course, not using this e-mail address...

  • This event is a VALID CRITICISM of Linux--LISTEN!! (Score:3)

    by deusx ( 8442 ) on Tuesday November 23, 1999 @12:26PM (#1509656) Homepage
    As the subject says-- I think that the fact GT fears the customer support for UT for Linux should be TELLING US SOMETHING.

    UT isn't a clue-requiring program to get running under Windows. Under Linux, I'm not sure-- I'm still downloading the binaries-- but if my experience with getting any other non-distribution-targeted binary to run, I understand their fear.

    GLIBC 1.x, 2.x, 2342.23423-- who expects an average gamer to know the difference?? Libraries? Support packages? Various bits and pieces not necessarily shared between distributions?

    Now, I'm a Linux advocate and, games excepted, my PC staus in Linux 90% of the time. My Sony Vaio notebook got nuked the day I got it and Linux installed. When I get a binary package, and it seems to be missing some dependencies, I know how to chase them down-- i.e. through the docs, through HOW-TO's, even through Deja.com searches. Sometimes, I even chase down the source and recompile it myself by hand, and have been known to tweak Makefiles and the source itself.

    This isn't a problem for me.

    However, might it be a problem for less clueful Linux users? Granted, the case could be made that, currently, success in setting up Linux at all is the result of a certain cluefulness. (That's another long running criticism that I won't touch further here.)

    But either way, the gamble could seem very scary to a company like GT looking to make some money off sales. The price of one service call could wipe out the profit from the purchase of the game?! OUCH! Even with a disclaimer saying, "Don't call us, you're on your own," they're not entirely clear of the problem I think.

    I think this issue is more complex than, "Bad GT, no biscuit!"

    In their (and our) favor: The UT team wasn't burned at the stake for making a Linux port, and allowed to release it. Good GT, here's a cookie.

    Against us: Linux is not yet clue-free enough for a quick, nearly support-free installation of games.

    Against them (and us): Linux is not enough of a contender enough in the gaming market for GT to invest in hiring and training Linux gurus for support. Or, for that matter, hire developers who specifically know how to work Linux to solve installation problems in the first place.

    So what's my answer? Enjoy the port. Work to make Linux more uniform in basic ways. BUY THE STINKING GAME IF YOU WANT TO PLAY IT, DOWNLOAD THE BINARIES, SEND IN YOUR REGISTRATION CARD WITH GLOWING LINUX PRAISE. Piracy blows the chances of Linux EVER becoming a contender to be considered investing development of software and games for a company like GT.

    (Granted a case here could also be made for Open Source game development, but that's another can of worms... but even on this GT appears to be flexible, as per Greenmarine's .plan. Another cookie.)

  • I'm just thrilled that the linux port was done at all! I reserved my copy (the software store nearest me ran out this morning) and will be d/l'ing the linux binary this evening.

    The more games, the better.
  • Sure, it worked for you, but will it work on:

    Slackware, Debian, OpenLinux, RedHat 5 & 6, Mandrake, Corel, Joe's-Homebrew-Linux-Built-From-Scratch.

    A customer support NIGHTMARE.

  • You must have been looking at the download links for the Linux UT /demo/ and not the executables for the full game. Here are download links:

    download UT400 executables [epicgames.com]
  • I don't think its a childish reaction. I think many of us don't want to support a company (i.e. GTI) which is not willing to even acknowledge linux even in an unsupported manner.

    What is the revenue breakdown between Epic and GTI. Say its 50/50 (support costs a bunch). Am I willing to subsidize Windows users? Hell no. (Sorry Epic, I know it was a last minute thing.)

    Some will say that Epic has released the linux x86 binary on their web site. If I were a windows user considering linux, should I be responsible for researching the web for every linux game I want to play? It is possible, but an unreasonable amount of effort IMO. Does anyone know if the CD has a readme file pointing to linux binaries at Epic's site? Most likely not.

    The guy from Epic looks like he tried his best and I commend him. I wish GTI saw the light. The game sounds good. I hope those who do decide to purchase the game let their voice be heard through their registration card.
  • If I were to purchase UT at full retail price, I don't get the same package as a user who's running it on windoze. Yes, I can download the linux binary. I can run it on my machine. I purchase the license to run the game. I do not, however, get the same package as someone who's running it under windoze because I don't get tech support.

    Granted, the online community is a much better source for help for just about anything, and I greatly appreciate that. However, I'm not going to spend the same amount of money on UT and not get what everyone else is getting. I'd like to thank Epic for making it available for linux, that's an excellent thing. I'd like to support you in that regard, but I'd rather not allow this trend of putting out a windoze version and allowing linux users to get the short end of the stick by purchasing the retail copy but not getting the whole package (meaning tech support, even if it's much less likely to occur with linux users for the most part) continue. I believe that, while at least we get the game, we don't get the same value out of the product that others get.

    Thank you Epic, for trying your best and sticking up for us. I'm just disappointed that this precedent of the "unsupported" platform continues.

  • It says right on the box, and I quote: "A downloadable Linux version is available at www.unrealtournament.com"
  • Yes, Linux is more than Intel, especially code wise, but it's Linux/non-intel vs Linux/Intel is very much like Linux vs Windows: dwarfed by comparison. I have one sparc box running Linux and four x86 boxen with Linux. Most people only have x86 boxen (heck, the only reason I have Linux running on a sparc is my work (sysadmin), and I got my wrist tapped for that (slapped is too harsh for the reaction)).

    Also, AIUI, 3d hardware support seams to be better on x86 ATM, though I seem to remember mention (on the glx mailing list) of glx working on alpha (pci) and ppc.

  • The problem, AC, is that BeOS currently has no hardware accelerated 3D support. If you had stopped manically advocating for five seconds and actually thought about the issues for a minue, this would have occured to you.

    I'd suspect that the Big Game Companies (tm) are waiting for BeOS 5, so they'll get the groovy accelerated OpenGL.
  • Your own statement answers your question. They
    chose not port to BeOS because they didn't get
    "enough BeOS user feedback".

    Uh-huh. The fact there is currently no
    3D acceleration for BeOS is irrelevant?

    BeOS 5 looks like a fine gaming enviroment, but It's Not Ready Yet. When will it be released? When it's ready.

    I think I've heard that before somewhere ...




  • The thing is, I don't think that Epic or GT are loosing any sleep over the fact that you chose not to purchase UT. As vocal as we are, and as much as it may seem not like it here, we (Linux users who won't boot to win) are still a pretty small group.

    The only person suffering is you. You are being petty (downloading a patch is NOT a big deal: knowing Epic you will have to patch a number of times anyways) and missing out on a fun game. Hope whatever satisfaction having punished GT gives you makes up for that (and Q3 is a better game anyways).

    -
    We cannot reason ourselves out of our basic irrationality. All we can do is learn the art of being irrational in a reasonable way.
  • Perhaps these articles should specify that only
    Linux/i386 binaries have been released. Remember,
    when you just say "Linux" you are implying more
    than just Intel.

    An interesting point, but sadly probably moot. In Australia, non-Intel hardware is both horribly rare and horrificly overpriced (compared to Intel stuff) due to simple economies of scale. Hell, second hand Sparc machines are beyond the pale in terms of pricing. Curse you, Craig Derwick!

    Show me a dual G4 ATX MB for less that AUS$800 and I'll be in like Flynn!




  • That readme is OLD! Look at the version number it lists stuff for!

    I don't have my TNT2 installed yet (just got it yesterday, waiting for the rest of the computer to arrive :), so I can't confirm this - but there are some files having to do with OpenGL in the System/ directory of the demo...
  • 80 bucks? I picked it up at best buy for $45 including the BeOS Bible. I guess it must not be selling too well. I know I wouldn't have paid $80 for it... even with the book.
  • because it's their code, not somebody elses. UT can licences the code out to the general public under the GPL and still distribute the same code in binary for only in their game. Now, when external developers start contributing code is where things get sticky; the (legal) solution to this is what the FSF does with gnu code: to require copyright assignment to UT for any code that is to go into the actual game. That said, I'm not sure how I would feel about such a situation, but GPLing the Linux UT code would actually benefit them: they get improvements, but other game companies cannot legally use the code without making arrangements with the UT poeple.

  • While this is true from some sort of weird theoretical perspective, its the sort of concept of fairness that just ends up screwing you.

    Consider: how much is tech-support worth to you? Have you ever called tech-support for a game? Would you be able to do so and not shrink away from the world out of shame afterwards?

    As a geek calling tech support is so far from my mentality, that I can't even do it at work when my computer breaks (to everyones irritation since they want me to do what I'm paid for). A geek does not call for help when things don't work. A geek learns. There are many things I would sooner do than talk to some clueless phone-support person for a games publisher, who probably knows less than me about Linux anyways.

    -
    We cannot reason ourselves out of our basic irrationality. All we can do is learn the art of being irrational in a reasonable way.
  • > But buying a product that I don't want will
    > only encourage them to continue selling

    > products that I don't want, often at the

    > expense of the products that I do want.


    Well, keep in mind that without the UT CD, you can only play the demo... You would be downloading the game for free, and buying a CD of maps, player models, textures, etc. to make the game engine worth playing. (It's actually a very good way to open source video games and still make some money.) If you do want to play UT, the CD is useful, although it would be nice if we were spared the download.


    But... If you don't want UT, why are you arguing about it? I was mostly trying to suggest that people refrain from attacking Epic for taking a step towards being a "Linux games company". Although if you don't want UT, (or like Q3 better for some reason, or whatever) then you're probably wasting your time in this particular topic anyway. :-)

  • Do you suppose that someone's keeping track of how many download-requests servers get for UT/Linux?
  • No version of Unreal/Unreal Tournament, on any platform, ever, will ever even approach the level of any game produced by id software, ever.
  • Wait a sec. How many people out there have NEVER had to patch a game before? How many games have you bought and had to go home only to find out that you had to (or at least should) download a patch to the game? How many of those patches erased your save game files? PC gaming is all about patches so sooner or later you windows people are going to have to patch UT. So the linux people download the patch as the first thing? BFD. Buy the game, it's great. Besides, 3-D is faster under Windows. --Linux can never beat windows because people are dumb.
  • Does this release support non Voodoo cards? I downloaded the whole demo (50 megs on a 38400 connection!) only to find out that it wouldn't support my TNT2. I was thinking of getting UT to support the release of Linux games but if Epic isn't going to support other cards I can't justify the expense just to have a Windows only game. If I'm missing something, somebody please let me know. I know that q3 said it only supported Voodoo but I got my TNT2 to work, if something like that is in order I'll pick my UT up as soon as possible.
  • I'm going to pirate the registration cards.
  • I couldn't get OpenGL to work with the files included with the demo. All I could get was a segment violation.
  • Nothing against Sweeney, but I don't buy the argument. Sure, GT's motivation is purely profit, but what's the evidence to support Linux binaries would wipe out any profit from increased sales? Historically (although it's starting to change), Linux users are significantly more PC-intelligent than the Windows user. The typical successful Linux user doesn't call up Red Hat for support; he locates the proper newsgroup, searches dejanews, or *shock* locates relevant docs on the Web.

    If the Linux support is mature, it shouldn't raise many more issues than the Windows binary. If it isn't yet mature, then do what id did for a while: clearly stamp it as unsupported (admittedly, non-support is more obvious if the user must dl the binaries electronically).

    The typical user who is likely to call up a phone number upon hitting a problem isn't terribly likely to even have Linux, much less use it exclusively. Recall that part-time Linux users often dual-boot just for games, and wouldn't be shut out if the Linux version didn't work; they'd at least try under Windows before calling up a phone number.

  • hmm not true, I have found redhat 6.1 easier to install than win. but then again I still feel more at home with win, so linux has a ways to go
  • Currently it doesn't support any other cards, and unlike Q3 they only released the Glide renderer, so you won't be able to get it to work on your TNT2. The reason you can get Q3 to work is because it uses OpenGL.

    Having said that, Brandon Reinhart got permission to release certain portions of the code. Some of that code will be what he has done so far with a Mesa renderer, which means that support for other cards could be just around the corner.

  • >but other game companies cannot legally use the code without making arrangements with the UT poeple.

    Unless the other game companies GPL their code. Which is only a matter of time for a game with a custom engine that isn't likely to be licensed. It would be a bad idea for id to GPL q3. For a game like myst or warcraft GPLing the code could very well work, since mose of the value is the art and story attached to it. These would still fall under copyright.
  • You're right in that for most of us, tech support is unnecessary. I mention that the community is a far greater source of help than tech support.

    IBM sells DB2 for linux, and supports it. Sybase does the same for their products. Q3 will have linux support, as well as a physical product for us. Sure, we get UT up and running on linux. We're all used to helping ourselves rather than relying on others. I've learned far more just by setting up my machine than I ever could if I relied on some company's tech support. It's also a lot of fun to tweak the system to no end.

    Again though, I'd much rather see software that's developed for linux supported as well, not just unleashed. If there's a linux newbie out there who wants to get this game up and running, and they've paid for the product, they deserve the same support (as awful as it may be) a windoze user would get. They may just be learning linux, that's good for us all because that's one more linux user out there. But they may have no clue how to get the game running, and no clue where to turn.

    Open source software excels in community help. That's one of the main attractions to me because there's a wealth of info out there. I also get to play with the code if I want, which satisfies my urges to play with things. :) But while we may be more typical of the average linux users, we're not the only kind.

  • >(It's actually a very good way to open source video games and still make some money.)

    Epic's hope is that if UT is successful (and it looks like it will be) they can then licsense the engine out to other companies. If companies GPLed their engine and just sold the graphics and story, the other companies would just take the code and develop their own GPLed game, with their own graphics and story. Not so good for Epic.
  • And I repeat: "What is this crap?" I have linux running on 3 machines and bsd on 2, ppc and 68k repectively. I don't have a single x86 boxen running Linux. Does that make me one of "the wee people". Do I make you laugh. How bout i make you laugh this way:

    I make the kick ass Linux break out and conquer all the desktops drown m$ in its own vomit killer app. And i only release the PPC binary shouting at the top of my lungs "Step right up and buy the definitive LINUX DESKTOP APP, no others need apply." How you gonna like them apples. It runs on Linux (PPC that is) and you can't have it. You want it bad, so bad you can taste it. But I already have a Linux version, why should I recompile for x86?

    Second - non-Portable code is crap - only exceptions being tweaking, hand crafted/loved assembly, and drivers. If it ain't Scottish, it's Crap!

    You seemed to miss the meat of this article, that a minority (**** 3% ****) was being ignored, made second class, being black balled, then you turn right around and do this very thing, non x86 is not significant. We are Significant even if we aren't a majority.

    my rant, I now conclude:

    Everyone matters.
  • if your game isn't heavily threaded, just compile it for glibc2.0. This will get you 95% or more of the market, since glibc2.1 can run glibc2.0 apps transparently. That last 5% of (OLD) slackware users can install the glibc package, using pkgadd. Trust me, anyone running an old version of slackware can handle that.

    The linux is fragmented argument is only really valid for heavily multithreaded applications like mozilla.
  • A question twords the future, will "For Linux" mean for Linux/i386 [The Platform] or will it mean for Linux [The OS]? Which would you rather it imply?
  • Oh come on. no one is demanding anything on a silver platter. Why would I pay for something, when I can get something I prefer for free?

    The better API of BeOS doesn't quite make up for the fact that I can't get at the code. I'm not criticizing Be for being closed, its their code, and their choice, but its simply not worth the money when I can get something better thats free (in both senses of the word).

    I can get Redhat for free from an ftp server. I can't (legally) do the same with BeOS.

    Plus, my quick echo DSP code runs with lower latency under Linux with mingo's patch than under the "media os" BeOS. And if I want to be hardcore, I can use David Olofson's RT/Linux soundcard driver harness and have latency limited only by the PCI burst size.
  • BeOS has much better APIs than linus for things like audio plugins, although Linux has gone from nothing to nearly catching up in under a year. I give Linux another 6 months max before it is way more compelling for audio applications than BeOS.

    Video is a different matter entirely, due to patent issues, closed formats and NDAs, and I think this is really where Be will find their niche. Looks like we finally have a replacement for the amiga.
  • I like giving my messages catchy titles....

    Actually, from my understanding of the game sellers market this is actually, possibly a positive message. Did you know that up until this year every hybrid Win9x/MacOS game sold was counted as a PC sell by all the major stat people, even the stores themselves. Now hybrids have thier own catagory. I own 5 hybrid discs and not one has touched an x86 and yet all data that gets compiled and shoved down my gullet says "Thanks for purchasing five more Win9x games." Oh, you may say, fill out the reg card. I did. Game companies never use those for sale volume numbers, way to unreliable. I basically screwed myself over. Not only did I increase the numbers for Win9x by 5, I basically decreased the sales of my OS of Choice by 5. Ain't that a kick in the pants and a trouser full of fish.

    So I say, DON'T! DON'T BUY THE Win9x BOX, it will only increase the percieved purchases by Gates drones. Do donwload at least once the binary for Linux. You will be stealing from the Win9x crowd. Tim Sweeney of Epic will be able to say, "You sold this many boxes, and there were this many downloads for linux, that means 3% (or 7% or 20% or 35%) of the sales were really for linux. Better include them on the CD next time, they might not be so generous."

    To Repeat

    Don't buy Win9x box
    Download Linux binary
    Cackle as percived sales are re-adjusted

    As Scrouge McDuck says, "Work smarter, not harder."
  • >Besides, 3-D is faster under Windows.

    Tell that to the g[24]00 owners. Interesting to note that the linux GL driver that is faster than its windows counterpart is the one that's been Opensource the longest, and has the most documentation. And John Carmack helping out.

    If matrox would release the programming info for the WARP engine, instead of just a binary file full of microcode, I'm sure things would get even faster.

    Don't discount the G400 MAX as a gaming card for linux. Its no Geforce, but its quite respectable.
  • Registration cards are like valentines...you really care how many you get, but you never go showing around what's written on them.

    Do you think GT will tell LucasArts or Bungie or HasbroInteractive how many cards they got saying "I love linux and bought this Win9x game to actually play it under linux." Yah right, and when i bought X-COM (1,2,and 3) to play under VirtualPC on MacOS, I told MicroProse that, I don't think they passed it on to any other companies. No, LucasArts and Bungie and HasbroInteractive will look at the box sales and say, the Win9x market for this genre is strong, lets make some money.

    Registration cards are crap, at least as far as swaying what platform. They are just pleasantly worlded consumer porfiling, to be sold if the price is right.

    If your so all fired pumped up to do you duty, wait awhile for the MacOS port, buy that box. That's one less sale for Gates, One more sale for MacOS, and One more sale (if you fill out that precious registration card) for Linux.

    Meanwhile I'm downloading the Linux Binary from 7 different IPs, Eat My Mind Flame Win9Xers.
  • i did read somewhere, Linux Games dot com [linuxgames.com] i think thatt he euro version was made with linux binaries, they mentioned gtvalue.com [gtvalue.com] ill try track down the exact story and post it here..
  • Ok this is it, from Linux Games:

    Joe Waters [mailto] of Aegistech [aegistech.com], developers of one of the first commercial Linux titles (BFRIS [aegistech.com]), sent in the following situation report:

    Greetings,

    Just saw the note on linuxgames about UT not making it to the retail CD at GT's
    request... An interesting sort of side-note is that a different division of GT
    Interactive, GT Value Europe, *did* include Linux binaries of our game BFRIS on
    the retail CD in Europe as part of the "GT Select" line. BFRIS just began
    selling in Europe and we recently received a copy of the English/Italian/Spanish
    version, which does include linux binaries on the CD along with the win32
    binaries. I know that BFRIS is also selling in Germany and Holland, but don't
    have details (yet) about where else in Europe it might be available on store
    shelves. Keep in mind that GT "main line" (which is distributing Unreal
    Tournament in the US) is a different division from GT Value Europe, but I
    thought it was interesting that GT Europe was apparently willing to tackle the
    support overhead.


    That said, I can sympathize at least with GT's UT concerns: 90%
    of the support calls and emails for BFRIS are from linux customers -- this
    isn't a dig against linux users, but more due to the constantly changing
    nature of linux kernels, libraries, OpenGL standards, hardware driver
    development, etc. As we were doing all of our own support (and linux is the
    primary development platform) we can field the questions and it's not a big
    deal, but I'd hate to try to train a bunch of win32 people on how to answer the
    various linux-related support questions.
  • maybe gt euro will follow suite with what they did with bfris. this would be good :)
  • While it's been my experience that using tech support is typically a last resort, it would be foolish to say that we don't rely on the expertise of others to advance our own knowledge. We do this through newsgroups, how-to's, and other means. I've worn a few hats in this industry, and I can say that I appreciate knowing there's a tech there. The linux world may use different methods, but the purpose and result are the same.

    I think our community has something great in the sense that there's just so much support out there online, and it's great knowing that we're just a search-engine away from an answer, instead of being on hold for the next 15 or so minutes.

    Puffing up ones chest and saying "tech support, we don't need no steenkin tech support" drips with a little too much pride for me. It's a necessary evil, every now and then. In the case of games, I can't say I've needed to call, but as someone who used to work in a service center (you try figuring out those Packard Bells on your own!), I can say that I've appreciated having someone on the other end of a phone. The great part is, like most geeks, I walked away, knowing more than I did, and grew slightly less dependant on someone else for help.
  • Don't buy Win9x box
    Download Linux binary
    Cackle as percived sales are re-adjusted


    Advocating piracy - now that's the stuff to give to the troops!

    Sheesh, and &c
  • Curse English and its ambiguous grammar!

    Time for the FSF to develop GNU/Esperanto or something of that kidney.

    "I'm sorry, sir, but I don't speak predicate calculus".
  • You mis-understood me (because I didn't make it clear): I was only pointing out the thinking, not saying it was the right thing to do, so I didn't miss the point at all. It was not a double standard, I would like to see games ported to the other platforms to. My wife would like an iMac (for it's looks, she's happy with Linux:), though we can't afford it ATM, and if we ever got one, I'ld like to be able to do all the things I currently do on my x86 boxen. It's actually this lack of inter-platform support that prevented me from seriously considering an alternative platform when I got my new computer. If it wasn't for the strangle-hold Intel has on the industry, it wouldn't have been an issue. Okay, that may seem to be a double standard to you except for this: Microsoft has nothing to offer me, especially with game developers looking at Linux, but, right now, Intel does. I'ld love to play with the StrongARM (even though Intel makes them now) or a ppc, but I can't justify the additional cost as it would have to be an additional machine rather than a replacement for what I did get.

    I agree totally with your comment on portable code. I used to feel the other way, but that was back in the days of learning to program (in the first place) in dos, which is a very bad influence; I have since seen the light, and now, whereever possible, my code is portable.

    Where does that quip about Scottish come into it? My grandfather was Scottish (dead, RHS), so it's got me rather curious.

    Sorry I got you steamed, it was not my intention.

  • Yes, I should have made that distinction, I was thinking it. And you're right, most of the value in q3 is the engine, rather than the art. Not so much for the engine itself, but rather it's extensibility and the network code. I would say that in many cases, people with by q3, throw out the pre-packaged artwork and create their own (all those add-ons:).
  • ...The linux is fragmented argument is only really valid for heavily multithreaded applications like mozilla.

    Really? Well, I've had a few problems here and there in the past with binary packages other than Mozilla, which I'm completely willing to slate up to cluefulness I've since gained.

    But, I've seen a bit of FUD about Linux market fragmentation and incompatibilities. Perceptions are stronger than realities, since the first are the only way we know anything about the second.

  • What possessed you to end a mature, if fact free post with a regression to 8th grade? if you're going to say something like that without backing it up, that's fine. Just don't add a useless insult, that only reflects badly on you and I'm sure does nothing to actually hurt the feelings of the person you're trying to insult. Posting this anonymously was probably a good idea, you never know if people you know are going to read this.
  • Well, me too, in general, but the difference is that with RedHat you learn what you need to do and do it. With Windows, you try it repeatedly until it works. You don't ever learn anything. You just try random crap until it runs.
  • As far as I can tell I at no point advocate piracy - the binary is freely downloadable, they are assuming you are going to use it with the data on the CD and not just send it to dev/null. Which is what I say to do. Several Times, from different IPs.

    And if I was advocting piracy I would be in excellant company, did you know Ghandi making salt from ocean water was an act of piracy, stealing from the British Commonwealth thier rightfull salt tax? And for the US of Aers out there, I should not have to mention the Boston Tea Party. Now I am advoacting dressing up as a Penguin and tossing Windows EULAs in the drink if you are asking.

    So don't pirate, legally go acquire the binary and let it take up space or launch it into space, I don't care. It's FREE, as in FREE BEER!, Chug till your hearts content.
  • To everyone that thinks that companys don't look at registration cards, think again. Those cards cost money. The bulk rate postage costs money. Mailroom workers cost money. Why would they spend all this money if they were going to ignore the cards. Sure they use the data you give them for marketing and stuff, but do a couple of pieces of junk mail really matter that much? Just don't give them your phone number (If I ever get my hands on those bastards at Interplay...). Besides, i work in advertising and sometimes I have to deal with the results of these registration cards.

    Even if they don't share the info with other companies (which I'm sure they don't) they will still realize that there is a Linux market out there and probably be more supportive in the future. Then other companies will notice that someone is making money off of the Linux market. Then they will start supporting it. It's a nice little circle.

    Think about it

    Pete
  • no harm intended
    None felt (other than being mis-understood).

Slashdot Top Deals

Kleeneness is next to Godelness.

Close