Nice to see, the more choices the better. I think it will be really interesting this year to see if the Steam console actually manifests itself and when/if it does, will it get any real traction? I hope it does because the more competition for Microsoft and Sony, the better off the gaming market will be.
Steam just needs to allow for trading/selling of used games, and it would be even better, but I'm sure the publishers have a lot to say about that. Hopefully the EU forces that feature on them.
> From a reliable source at the company, I have been told at least one of their very popular titles will see a release for Ubuntu Linux this calendar year. I was told this in person and was a statement backed up by additional proof.
Considering the same source (Phoronix) basically reported the same thing about Valve/Steam and was proved correct, I think we can give it the benefit of the doubt.
Michael had been reporting that Steam was soon comming to Linux ever since 2006. Just because Valve with the changes from Microsoft decided that they needed a backup plan six years later doesn't mean that Michael is a good source for news.
He's comparable to a gambler who by the Roulette table repeats the mantra "It will hit 12". Eventually he'll be right, but that doesn't make him a credible source when it comes to predicting what number the ball will hit.
And Blizzard have had a Linux client for WoW ever since alpha which testers were allowed to use up until the release of the game. But as we can see that client has yet to see the light again for the eight years that have passed after the games release.
Big companies like Valve and Blizzard have a ton of different projects that never see the light of day. In the case of Linux clients it's most likely because the man hours needed even to support them doesn't pay back in new customers.
I'm sure that Starcraft 2 is still a commercial success. It might not have made as much as WoW yet, but as expansions come out it will definitely is going to make a lot of money. I'm sure they'll also experiment with different monetization models like they are with Diablo 3.
Starcraft 2 is certainly a commercial success, but it will never, ever make as much money as WoW. WoW grosses more than SC2's total sales every five or six months.
I'm wondering if it's worth it though. I run WoW fine through Wine.
After how much trial & error?
I realize Linux users are not Windows users, but how well would WoW have sold if the installation was as painful as a Wine setup can be for Joe User? If the install-to-run experience is a pain in the arse, this is a barrier to adoption. In commercial terms, this has financial ramifications.
Afaik Blizzard always had an internal Linux client [1] but never wanted to make it public.
One of the big problems with Linux, and this is from other game developers too, is the problem of targeting a specific version of the platform. Since everyone is free to create their own distros, they can become somewhat unstandardized. That makes "targeting linux" difficult.
Add on that there are far fewer linux users than windows/mac users, and that you can play wow on linux using Wine... and there isn't a lot of reason to target even a specific distro
Yes, if you have the resources and client base of Blizzard, it's a lame excuse. Most of the time if you want it to run on different versions of Linux all you need to do is recompile.
If, over the long term, it's costing you 40% to keep the popular versions of Linux working, then you're doing something wrong. Could it hypothetically cost that much? Sure, but only if you're incompetent.
Long answer: Hell yes, especially over the long time. You've ever tried to target the Linux desktop ecosystem, you will know that it is a moving target. I'm not talking about the server/command line ecosystem, that one is relatively easy.
On the higher level, the desktop ecosystem has seen a number of major platform changes over the past years. GTK 2 -> 3, compositing, new X extensions, etc. Each change results in subtly different semantics that can break apps.
On the lower level, the ABI (not API) keeps changing. Many g++ releases change the C++ ABI, and most games are written in C++. Each glibc version adds new symbol versions.
Binaries that worked 5 years ago may not work anymore.
Yes, if you're going to target Linux, all of that's part of the deal. A game should primarily depend on OpenGL+X+audio, and while these do change, if the program works on one distribution of Linux, it tends to work on the next. The worst issue I've found is that when a new distribution first comes out, it can be glitchy, also I had problems with Intel's Sandy Bridge architecture when it first came out, but the same scope of problem did not occur cross-distribution, given the same kernel.
Yes, if you're going to target Linux, all of that's part of the deal.
Which is a baffling thing to have to wrap your head around when you look at all the people who say that Linux should be treated seriously by game developers--which will make people flock to Linux! so more people can make games for it! because that will really happen!
If you say you want people to build houses in your housing development (houses that have no buyers, but forget it, we're rolling) it really sort of behooves you to not be demanding that they build a house on land that starts at "silty" and doesn't really get better from there.
A game should primarily depend on OpenGL+X+audio, and while these do change, if the program works on one distribution of Linux, it tends to work on the next.
This comment deserves a LOL WUT pear of some kind but it's not quite appropriate here (so if you'd like to think of your favorite one I'd appreciate it). Audio? On Linux? Working from one distribution to another? No way. It's a mess, it's still a mess, and it's been a mess that is doing a wonderful impression of a full-blaze tire fire for going on a decade now, especially with older--yes, closed-source, it's not going away in games--software. Closed-source Linux games from the Loki era, by and large, don't work and when they do it's through fairly herculean efforts...and they do not exactly rely on GTK or KDE version p.
Oh! And JACK sucks and is bad and its developers should feel bad. (Not game-related, more music-production related, but I felt like throwing that in there. I tried to use Ardour this week and it's made me a bit militant.)
Can't say I've tried every distro out there but my OpenGL+X+audio system has worked fine across the several popular ones I've tried, it's getting better.
And anyway, the point wouldn't be to support all platforms, just the prevailing ones, so I'd say your remarks miss the mark.
That's only what it appears like on the end user's side. On the developer's side, it's much more messy. We're talking about binaries that stop working between two releases of the same distro even when the APIs don't change.
It's easy to dismiss this with saying "it's part of the deal" but if it takes too much effort for minimal gain it's not worth it. I'm fine with breaking changes if they improve things but there should be at least a compatibility later for some period of time.
Unfortunately, simply shipping different versions of a library is not enough to provide compatibility. There are two issues at work: 1) as mentioned before, platform ABI changes 2) ELF works with a big flat symbol table, so if you load library foo version 1, but a dependency loads library foo version 2, then things blow up.
I am on the developers side, and if I can do it myself, certainly Blizzard with all their resources can. Or perhaps I'm just so brilliant and supremely competent that they'd need 40 engineers to do what I can do with a few hours here and there.
I guess I should thank all you naysayers for the compliment.
I just gave you a few reasons why "if the program works on one distribution of Linux, it tends to work on the next" is not true. The C++ ABI keeps changing, even between releases of the same distro. They don't provide backward compatibility, it just stops working.
In the past we used to port Unix programs(very complex CAD programs) to Linux.
It took a week to have something that we could use. A week!! In a couple of months we had a serious product.
This is what you get when you program with standards in place. Developers love to use the last trick of the week, with new proprietary languages but you should not let them if that means not being portable or easy to upgrade.
They're not there yet. Steam for Linux only supports Ubuntu officially. Otherwise, you have to resort to installing dependencies for some of the games manually and other tinkering. Serious Sam 3 even asks for root access that it can install the libraries it needs.
I don't get this. It's a multi-GB game that already needs to be downloaded over internet. Why don't they just bundle the dependencies, or at least make it installable via steam as a separate component? There should be no reason for a game to ever ask you to become root.
I also had a really cryptic error that I was able to solve by unplugging my xbox 360 controller wireless adapter. I later figured out that I could have also just started TF2 with the -nojoy option.
Things feel really beta (but that's ok given that it is one).
The way to deal with that is pick a few standard versions. Businesses do that all the time - my workplace is standardized on RHEL 6. Then you release a client and say "We know it runs on this flavor of Linux. You're welcome to try running it on other stuff, but if it doesn't work that's on you."
Speaking of which, why is a native binary better than wine? I know wine is typically associated with pain, because the app developers don't support it properly, but then native doesn't work /at all/ without developer support.
If developers /are/ going to support linux in some way, why should they support multiple platforms [distros] when they could support one [treating wine as a minor variation on their existing windows support]?
(Not trolling, I'm sure there are good reasons that I haven't had enough morning caffeine to think of; plus it might be useful for someone to make a definitive list somewhere)
The issue is with them using Direct3D, which will be slower on wine, as well as platform differences that wine can't abstract well. Past that, wine isn't that bad of a target. Limbo's linux port for instance is simply a bundled CrossOver installation.
> Nvidia has announced a huge increase in Linux gaming performance for their GeForce R310 drivers after almost a year of development alongside Valve and other game developer partners.
Can someone explain why? Can't a game be run in full-screen mode anymore? Would there be technical issues during the installation of the game? Privileges issues? No more Direct X?
Am guessing this is something to do with windows store.
"The belief in the development community is that Microsoft will make Windows 8 a closed system, an operating system that seeks to more stringently control, much in the way that Apple does with Mac OS X and the iOS platform. This would allow Microsoft to better monitor the quality of applications running on its platform, but it will also wall off the most widely used operating system in the world from myriad developers. PC game makers use Windows because of the openness of the platform and its ubiquity. If Microsoft takes that openness away, what will developers do?"
I see it as an over reaction with people spreading bad news like the Mayans are changing world ending dates. Now everyone agrees that its popular to talk about how bad Windows 8 is and what the next End of World date is, but those people have not experienced at least one of those and more likely neither. Windows RT is store apps and Pro is store apps plus traditional apps. Naysayers... pffst! I'll stick to my nice Windows 8 Pro install because its pretty bad ass!
I'm going to speculate (and nothing more) just based on a few discussions a friend and I have had. It seems as though with Windows 8 and the trend towards unification with the mobile experience, Microsoft is headed in the path of a walled-garden style environment.
It may become more difficult (or just less convenient) for the consumer to select software that falls outside of the "Windows App Store" (whatever it may be termed).
This type of distribution model (Steam being another example) would be counter to Blizzard's apparent philosophy on the matter.
So I don't know that "Windows 8", the operating system, is bad for Blizzard. But maybe "Windows 8", the direction, is.
Again, 100% speculation. No necessary basis in fact, just ideas bounced around.
Point well received, but just to be dead sure: System Preferences -> Security & Privacy -> Allow Applications downloaded from: [X] Anywhere will restore previous behavior.
Honestly? It's the first I've heard from someone with interests that would lead them to Hacker News. Gatekeeper was talked about at length well before it was rolled out and it is super, super easy to find out how to disable it. There's a sort of minimum awareness beneath which I'd certainly expect to hear of people having trouble, but I'm a little surprised that they're here.
Don't you think this might be a case of "boiling the frog slowly"?
That's the impression I get from both Apple and Microsoft's recent OS/App Store directions.
A few years from now the apologists for each will be saying "Well hardly anyone but super techies ever used those options to disable verification anyway, so I understand why they turned them off".
> Don't you think this might be a case of "boiling the frog slowly"?
No, because that would be fantastically stupid of them and none of them are stupid. Not even Microsoft--I mean, I think the Metro slop is a joke, but no, they're not stupid enough to do that. What you are peddling doesn't even make sense because precisely what the fearmongerers (see, this goes both ways, think about that next time you call me an "apologist") because it is fairly unlikely that anyone is ever going to be writing native applications from an iPad so it really does follow that they need a mostly-unencumbered environment from which to make the software that makes the whirly buy-the-iPad-buy-the-apps wheel go around.
Which, as it happens, is what Apple has said for quite a while that they're doing: iOS is the daily-driver car and OS X is the do-work truck. Which, though I don't use iOS myself anymore, is a completely reasonable division of labor for the majority of computing tasks.
As with Valve, it has nothing to do with the OS which works for the most part as Windows 7 for these desktop apps and everything to do with Microsoft's App Store.
Their DOTA clone isn't a standalone game, or at least hasn't been so far. It is/was built on the StarCraft II engine, so if it were to support Linux, StarCraft II would pretty much have to as well. However, I think WoW is much more likely since it brings in a lot more revenue than StarCraft II.
Well then StarCraft II is a good target since the version coming in 2013 is basically an upgrade to the game that went out mid-2011. So it's an already proven and well-understood technology, easier to port; just like the Source engine games for Valve.
The technical considerations are uninteresting here: all of Blizzard's titles are optionally built to use OpenGL, letting them avoid the golden handcuffs of DirectX & Friends. So if porting is cost-effective, why would they do it when virtually all of their revenue comes from Windows systems?
I say: gatekeeper-free subscription gaming appliances.
There's no evidence the total Windows PC experience is getting any better or cheaper for the uninitiated, there's no evidence that Playstation or Microsoft will bend over and allow third party platforms on their consoles, and all of the new-era Desktop App Store UXes force significant technical and billing restrictions that would eat at Activision Blizzard's subscription and in-app business model and reduce their control over the game experience.
And I don't think this is a bet that desktop Linux/x86 is going to be relevant for gaming. It has no inherent advantages over classical Windows.
So I think this is a gamble that new-era quasi-consoles based on Android+Linux/ARM+x86 are going to succeed to some degree (be it the Ouya or Steam Big Picture or some Samsung Generico-Colossus that can spit out WiDi or whatever).
A keyboard, mouse, and controller capable Linux platform with no overarching gatekeeper and adequate gaming horsepower is going to be extraordinarily cheap in the near future. If Blizzard Activision gets their ducks in a row now, they'll be ready to jump into the first one that offers ten million users, a reasonable hardware target, and a bullshit-free content delivery mechanism.
Right, they obviously don't want to wed themselves to any particular "quasi-console", but they want to be ready if the "quasi-console" thing really picks up steam. That's how I see it.
I don't, but let me talk louder and slower in case I'm being unclear.
The goal is to sell subscriptions and in-app upgrades to game softwares of exceeding depth and breadth that are operated primarily with a keyboard and mouse.
The Windows PC has arrived at an unsubsidized price floor of about $300-$400 and is unlikely to go lower with Microsoft charging perhaps $40-$80/unit depending on who's licensing. This market sells ~350M units a year with a total installed base of 1.25 BILLION, yet unit sales are declining, desktop Linux is doing nothing to change this, and Blizzard's flagship title is in decline.
The Linux PC cannot go lower than $300-$400 despite essentially $0 licensing costs because virtually nobody is selling or buying raw Linux PC hardware. So the platform is drafting on boutique sales, whitebox sales, and repurposed Windows PCs while still offering no benefits above and beyond standard Windows PCs. At best, it's (currently) worse.
The classical consoles are off limits. Nintendo has no coherent Internet strategy evolving and a severe lack of onboard storage. Sony has allowed a single third-party platform which has no billing support, subscription or otherwise. Microsoft has no third-party platform support. All of these consoles come with significant licensing expenses and do not support software subscriptions. All of these consoles require major rework when porting existing PC titles due to custom CPUs, GPUs, and input frameworks.
Mobile as we understand it is either completely off limits (iOS) or unaccustomed to keyboard and mouse input (Android).
So if you are in the business of selling subscriptions and in-app upgrades to game software that requires keyboards, mice, and untrammeled billing pathways, what are your options for addressing new markets?
There is one: quasi-consoles. Stationary (TELEVISION OR MONITOR OVER HDMI) Android (LINUX) Consoles (MOUSE, KEYBOARD, CONTROLLER SUPPORT) with untrammeled billing pathways (BATTLE.NET) at dramatically lower price points than the existing options ($100) that will enable less-engaged gamers (ME) easy one-click access to pre-existing titles (WORLD OF WARCRAFT).
And in order to do that you first need your titles running on a Linux stack, addressing OpenGL hardware.
Which is what Blizzard Activision is (allegedly) doing.
I'd imagine that Valve would use their own Linux Distro for their Linux Steam client. When they make the GabeCube or whatever, it will run Linux with the Steam Client for Linux and play in TV mode for TV sets. I'd imagine it would also have Netflix, Hulu apps and other stuff added as well to compete with other video game consoles.
Since a lot of classic video games are DOS based, they'd just have to use the Linux version of DOSBox to run them, which shouldn't be too hard. In Windows games like Doom, Dark Forces, etc run in the Windows version of DOSBox when bought from Steam. I'm imagining Steam would also port their Sega Genesis emulator to Linux and other things as well.
I'd really like to see the Linux based GabeCube or whatever they call it (SteamTV?) that doesn't require a Windows license and can play most video games from Steam.
It has been nicknamed "SteamBox" by the rumormill.
Also, I hope they don't roll their own distro. Customizing an existing distro seems like a much better idea. Considering Steam Linux is currently targeted at Ubuntu, I'm guessing that's the distro of choice.
Good analysis and a good explanation of why I am so bullish on Android. It's going to be much bigger than phones and tablets because it's going to become the go-to application stack for anybody that wants to build a new special-purpose device.
Although they might not use Linux (a mistake in my opinion) rumors say Sony will use full native OpenGL for PS4, and coupled with x86 hardware, it should make it relatively easy for game developers to make a PS4 game and then port it to a Linux machine.
It's always pained me that the only AAA publisher/developer to maintain strong Mac support through thick and thin has been the one whose games I have no interest in (no slight intended, just not into MMOs, strategy, and hack 'n' slash).
Out of convenience. They're temporarily out of cash, but it's a cyclical business and they're going to have a very different balance sheet shortly.
The bankruptcy angle is being played up as the decision-makers are trying to ram a sweetheart sale through to ensure their own lucrative exit from an increasingly-difficult business. (Instead of actually considering competitive bids or seriously seeking funding to cover them until the money starts rolling in again.)
A group of shareholders has just filed suit over the issue.
In any event: there's no chance they stop making games and thus having an interest in the current platform upheaval.
They filed a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy which means they don't have to fully liquidate to their creditors and also means their debt is not absolved, merely that there is a trustee appointed to oversee their assets while allowing the business to continue. They could still end up filing a Chapter 7 in which they would have to liquidate and would mean the end of the company as we know it but they are not there yet.
Blizzard has to, Valve already has a Steam for Linux beta client and at least 41 games ported to Linux.
Team Fortress 2 for example plays better and faster with a higher frame rate on Ubuntu 12.10 Linux than it did on my Windows 7 Home Premium on my Acer laptop.
Oh yeah check out PlayonLinux http://www.playonlinux.com/ to run some Windows Video Games under WINE for Linux. The Windows Steam Client works great on WINE and most games can run on WINE just fine as well. For some reason Civilization V plays better under WINE than it did in Windows 7. I would like to see a Linux native version of Civilization V come out, it would rock. The PlayOnLinux Python client configures different WINE versions and profiles for you and it can even install Internet Explorer from version 1 to 8, and some versions of MS-Office (not all) if you really need them.
I see in the next five years a move to Linux as the next big gaming platform by major video game makers. The reason being Linux runs video games better than Windows, and does not cost as much as an Apple Mac OS X gaming machine. Microsoft is really killing themselves with Windows 8 and Windows RT, and software companies are considering moving to Linux as a result.
I believe that Linux will become very popular with games within 5 years, too, but even if you don't believe that, what is even more likely to happen is that most games will be made on OpenGL thanks to Android, iOS, (supposedly) PS4, and even Steam boxes. That in turn should make it a lot easier to support games on Linux in general, and in turn it might help the market share of Linux on the desktop, too.
I don't think many of existing games will be ported, but B-class (with medium budgets) games are coming to Linux in a big way. Wasteland 2, Eternity, Godus, Castle Story, Planetary Annihilation, War for the Overworld, Double Fine, Maia... "Indie" usually means a budget of around $100000, and smallest of these are multiples of that. Plus, almost all humble indie bundles fully support Linux.
I think the outcome is clear: some of these games will make a lot of money. Big publishers and devs will want a cut of the pie.
Does he mean one of the existing games will be ported to Linux, or the new game they're working on will have a Linux version as well ? If the first, I'm not interested. Blizzard used to release games that would set trends, that other developers would imitate or draw inspiration from. These days are over.
Steam just needs to allow for trading/selling of used games, and it would be even better, but I'm sure the publishers have a lot to say about that. Hopefully the EU forces that feature on them.
reply