Port for Linux.

(kamikazee) #181

[QUOTE=Joe999;205020]why should they do that?[/QUOTE]It boils down to “because running Windows on this hardware is a PITA”. Whether that’s caused by money, principles, a lack of specific software (dubious) or lack of low-level tweaking . The point remains that choice of OS is a matter of preference, comfort and maybe even performance (Linux versions supposedly squeezed out just a few FPS more); but no reason to find here which can’t be rationalized.

The interesting thing is that Linux users have barely no leverage; if all Windows users would refuse to buy the game the PC version is as good as dead, if the Linux users won’t buy it SD loses a feeble amount of money.
As such, the request to have a Linux version is rather one to beg for some courtesy. So far, the official answers seem to reflect this.

Oh, and this is the right time to ask for a Linux port. The global picture needs to be right if one ever wants a port. The detailed implementation should rather wait until someone has the time and shouldn’t detract from the development of the actual game.

(Nail) #182

The question isn’t if there should be a Linux port, but is there the personnel to do the job, the last Linux ports were done by id Software, not Splash Damage.

(Joe999) #183

imo if some linux users don’t buy it because they refuse to perform the totally trival task of using a secondary os (an os on which the game runs) on the same machine, then they don’t deserve to play ANY game in the first place. it’s about the game and maybe support for the devs who make the game, but it’s definitely not about the os. this would be like they want support while at the same time they don’t show support.

(halex) #184

It’s called voting with your feet. In the end, it’s up to the user if they want it or not; they’re just trying a method to voice their opinion more loudly by saying that they’ve lost a sale if they don’t get what they want (eg walking away if the guy in the markets doesn’t sell you his watch for $5. If you’re lucky he’ll lower his price from $10 to $5 before you walk off into the distance).

If SD (or Bethedsa) don’t want to do a Linux version - whether or not it’s because they see a market, have the people to do the port, or whatever - then that’s their prerogative (and cash). Just means Linux users like me will have to live with some reboot suckage (and loss of potential Tapir kudos).

Telling them “they don’t deserve it”, however, is kinda trolling. :slight_smile: I disagree with the impending internet censorship in my country (yay, thanks Labour), but just because I don’t want the law and am voicing my opinion doesn’t mean I don’t deserve this country!

However, on your point about not buying it because they don’t want to reboot into Windows, I do agree with you the users that do this are being a bit short sighted. I mean, sure, it’s certainly a pain in the ass, but not too difficult. It’s certainly more tempting if a native client is available, however.

To be blunt, I do only think this is going to happen in someone’s free time, definitely after release. No way it’s going to happen before then. I’d much rather see polish elsewhere in the game rather than a half-baked Linux client, anyway. Time is everyone’s enemy. Whether it’s done from within SD, TTimo or somebody else in the OSS community is yet to be seen. But it’ll be a while yet before we should really be discussing this again.

crosses fingers and hopes for the best

(Joe999) #185

you got that wrong. translated into your analogy the situation is more like “I disagree with the impending internet censorship in my country and hence i’ll stop using the internet” :slight_smile:

if a linux client is made, fine. but either you want a game badly or not. people enclosing themselves into invisible walls means being hypocrite.

(Floris) #186

Oh bugger off, I deserve to play games as much as you do. But having to boot into Windows just to play BRINK would lower the pleasure I would have of playing it to a level where it might not be worth playing at all, I’d rather stick with ET:QW, W:ET and Quake Live then.

(Simon80) #187

++ for a linux port

Having read through this entire thread, I could respond to a ton of different troll comments, but doing so would be frustrating and it’s obvious to me that it would also be futile.

I have been a gamer for almost as long as I’ve been alive. Thanks to growing up, however, I eventually lost the luxury of being able to spent limitless amounts of time on the video games I like. I have a strong aversion to maintaining a Windows installation that I don’t need, and gaming is the only reason why I would do it at all. Rebooting, running Windows update, and installing driver updates all take up precious time, and would detract from the gaming experience I would be getting. It’s simply not worth it for me when I have so little time to spend on games, and a strong desire not to use Windows that I have gradually developed over the last two decades (since 3.1 and DOS).

Though I have little time for games, Brink looks interesting enough that if it had a Linux port, I would buy it, especially since the Linux port of UT3 never landed. Given that the game doesn’t seem to have any big dependencies on non-portable APIs (i.e. DirectX), it wouldn’t make sense not to port it, since the effort would be relatively minimal, would result in better code quality on all platforms (a benefit that can’t easily be measured in financial terms), and would increase sales of the game.

If there’s no Linux port of Brink, I will be disappointed, but I’d just ignore it and save the money. I came to terms a long time ago with the fact that I don’t have the time to consume every game, movie, or article that I would want to, and it doesn’t bother me anymore. Instead, I will compute on my own terms, using software that I like, without wasting time on an OS I don’t want to use.

The trolls in this thread that keep trying to suggest that there’s no good reason to make a port clearly have no idea why we choose to use Linux. Since you keep arguing that dual booting is so easy, you should set up a dual boot with your choice of Linux distribution on it and see why for yourself. If it doesn’t strike your fancy, at least it will have temporarily distracted you from trolling.

(DarkangelUK) #188

You know what, i don’t get it… I REALLY don’t get it. An aversion to maintaining a windows installation? Rebooting? Driver updates??? Does Linux not require driver updates? Do you get the point of driver updates? The only updates I need to do are graphics drivers, and even then that’s optional.

I had Ubuntu on a 2nd machine and also have it on vmware, and it honestly feels like a step backwards for me.

I’ve been trying to fathom a reason of why to move purely to linux, and here’s what i’ve got.

The main one always seems to be ‘stability’, my PSU died and I replaced it 11 days ago… my PC has been running constantly since then, no reboots, no erratic behaviour, no crashing software… nothing. In all honesty, i’ve never had a ‘crash’, no bluescreen, no evil flag of MS on my screen with a gif of me being shafted by Bill Gates… it just doesn’t happen.

Next is speed. I’ve been on Windows 7 for about 35weeks now, it seems fast to me, certainly not sluggish. I have easy access to the services and can disable what i want, when i want to speed it up even more… but i don’t feel the need cos it’s not slow. Now this is in no way saying that it’s faster than linux, in fact no doubt linux will be faster… cos well there’s not really much to it. It’s the stripped out sportscar for speed… no stereo, no aircon, no trim… but i like all that, i WANT all that.

So software… well I have it all with windows, i’m not limited in my selection. Linux seems to be about ‘choice’, but i feel i have more choice with windows than I will ever have with linux. And of course games, since it’s the primary platform PC wise then there’s no shortage of them. I’m a gamer, and I’d have my hands tied if i went to linux… so i’d need to dual boot. But why would i want to do that when i can have it all with windows?

The only compelling argument I can see is… price. Linux is free… that’s the one and only argument i can see for myself. But I don’t mind paying for Windows, it’s something i’ll use a lot, it has everything i need, the majority of games and software work so i’ll definitely get my money’s worth.

I don’t believe this moral high ground stuff, evil Micro$oft and all that crap. What company ISN’T out to make money? One that won’t be in business for very long. Windows 7 is a good OS, therefore i’m happy to pay for it… and if my money helps the next version be just as good or better, then that’s good news for me. Not all versions of windows have been good, we can all admit that… have all releases of linux been good?

I’ll keep pottering about with Ubuntu in vmware, but in reality i see no reason for myself to move to it full time… it’d just be a step backwards… and i’m still waiting on that compelling argument that convinces me it’s better. I’m open to reason… someone show me.

(Floris) #189

In Linux most hardware support is build into the kernel, hence you do not need to install your own drivers. Only propriety drivers (like the NVIDIA graphics drivers) have to be installed manually if you want to use them - there are also open source alternatives, but that’s usually very easy with the packaging system such as YaST in distributions like openSUSE (though I believe Ubuntu has some nice tools for that too).

With Linux, you only have to reboot to activate a kernel upgrade, any other software product can be restarted on the fly. It’s like being able to upgrade from Windows 3.11 to Windows 7 without being forced to reboot. Then again, you will need to do a kernel update to activate most new functionality, but you get the idea.

Experienced Linux users can use the command line to do things much faster than possible through Windows’ UI or command prompt. Next to that, Linux is just a kernel, you choose whatever you want to use next to it. This allows for way more fine grained configurations than Windows allows. Programs which use a command line GUI also have a smaller memory footprint than their graphical counterparts, and some even allow mouse interaction.

Great that Windows has everything you need, it does not for me. Luckily for me however, the lack of games does not tie up my hands. Though the availability of Quake Live for Linux ties my hands to my mouse and keyboard way too many hours a day :smiley:

That’s the third plus for me :slight_smile:

Linux is not made by a company. It’s made by individuals, perhaps with commercial goals, or even sponsored by a company. I would joke that comparing the creators of Linux to the creators of Windows is almost like comparing communism to capitalism.

I guess the Linux and Windows models differ too greatly to make a fair comparison in terms of quality of releases. In a Linux distribution, you can fix the bugs yourself though, that’s a comfortable plus.

That’s fine. I like Linux because of the package management being great (thanks to openSUSE’s YaST), it crashes less often for me than Windows does, it runs all the software I need, and I can follow the development process very closely, even contribute to it. Oh yeah, I really like X’s window snapping, along with all kinds of other small features.

(timestart) #190

[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;205576]You know what, i don’t get it… I REALLY don’t get it. An aversion to maintaining a windows installation? Rebooting? Driver updates??? Does Linux not require driver updates? Do you get the point of driver updates? The only updates I need to do are graphics drivers, and even then that’s optional.

I had Ubuntu on a 2nd machine and also have it on vmware, and it honestly feels like a step backwards for me.

I’ve been trying to fathom a reason of why to move purely to linux, and here’s what i’ve got.

The main one always seems to be ‘stability’, my PSU died and I replaced it 11 days ago… my PC has been running constantly since then, no reboots, no erratic behaviour, no crashing software… nothing. In all honesty, i’ve never had a ‘crash’, no bluescreen, no evil flag of MS on my screen with a gif of me being shafted by Bill Gates… it just doesn’t happen.

Next is speed. I’ve been on Windows 7 for about 35weeks now, it seems fast to me, certainly not sluggish. I have easy access to the services and can disable what i want, when i want to speed it up even more… but i don’t feel the need cos it’s not slow. Now this is in no way saying that it’s faster than linux, in fact no doubt linux will be faster… cos well there’s not really much to it. It’s the stripped out sportscar for speed… no stereo, no aircon, no trim… but i like all that, i WANT all that.

So software… well I have it all with windows, i’m not limited in my selection. Linux seems to be about ‘choice’, but i feel i have more choice with windows than I will ever have with linux. And of course games, since it’s the primary platform PC wise then there’s no shortage of them. I’m a gamer, and I’d have my hands tied if i went to linux… so i’d need to dual boot. But why would i want to do that when i can have it all with windows?

The only compelling argument I can see is… price. Linux is free… that’s the one and only argument i can see for myself. But I don’t mind paying for Windows, it’s something i’ll use a lot, it has everything i need, the majority of games and software work so i’ll definitely get my money’s worth.

I don’t believe this moral high ground stuff, evil Micro$oft and all that crap. What company ISN’T out to make money? One that won’t be in business for very long. Windows 7 is a good OS, therefore i’m happy to pay for it… and if my money helps the next version be just as good or better, then that’s good news for me. Not all versions of windows have been good, we can all admit that… have all releases of linux been good?

I’ll keep pottering about with Ubuntu in vmware, but in reality i see no reason for myself to move to it full time… it’d just be a step backwards… and I’m still waiting on that compelling argument that convinces me it’s better. I’m open to reason… someone show me.[/QUOTE]

OK I’ll bite :slight_smile:

I’ll preface this by saying I’ve not used Windows Vista or Windows 7 because I don’t really have a reason to do so - I’m happy enough with Linux and I can do without games.

Most Linux distributions handle updating all your software and drivers through one interface - one command and everything is up to date. So you get used to doing this and Windows feels like a real step backwards with every program having it’s own updater or none at all. Sure you don’t need to be on the bleeding edge with everything all the time and personally I don’t see it as a major hassle, just inconvenient.

Software is a personal thing and there is lots of good software on both OSes. Personally I prefer opening up a console and typing a few commands to get something done to finding my way around a GUI. Oh and on Linux I have Xmonad :D.

As you say you don’t mind paying for Windows, well I’d rather not pay for something when I can get something I prefer for free. But you might as well stick with Windows.

(darthmob) #191

[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;205576]I had Ubuntu on a 2nd machine and also have it on vmware, and it honestly feels like a step backwards for me.
…
I’ll keep pottering about with Ubuntu in vmware, but in reality i see no reason for myself to move to it full time… it’d just be a step backwards… and i’m still waiting on that compelling argument that convinces me it’s better. I’m open to reason… someone show me.[/QUOTE]I guess one problem is what you expect and how you use it. I think many people just see it as a free Windows and use it like they would use Windows. Sure you can do that as there are a lot of programs that copy Windows behaviour and you can do most of the stuff with your mouse in GUIs but as a Windows clone it’s mediocre at best.

After the last upgrade my favorite window manager stopped working and I found myself without any keyboard shortcuts and was forced to basically use the vanilla setup. Guess what? I used Windows 7 instead as it simply offered a better experience that way. Linux isn’t better or worse than Windows, it’s different. And depending on how you use it it can be better. In my experience it offers a better experience in the following areas:

[ul]
[li] having many programs running at the same time (multiple workspaces are awesome! one desktop for browsing, one for messaging, one for programming etc.)
[/li][li] word processing (programming, latex)
[/li][li] everyday stuff (internet browsing, instant messaging, e-mail, listening to music, watching videos; see the first point of having much stuff running at the same time)
[/li][li] software installation / updating (package managers ftw, seriously it can’t get any easier)
[/li][li] making use of the keyboard to control windows, programs and everything else
[/li][/ul]
Many people present Linux as a happy sunshine instant win OS but without doubt you have to be willing to invest a lot of time to adapt to the OS and fix issues. Personally I think that Linux is right for people who a) spend a shitload of time in front of the computer or b) spend hardly any time in front of it and use only the most basic programs. :slight_smile:

[QUOTE=Florisjuh;205585]Though the availability of Quake Live for Linux ties my hands to my mouse and keyboard way too many hours a day :D[/QUOTE]What’s your ingame name? Feel free to add me!

(Linux-user) #192

Not true. If you’d have posted this reply a few years ago you’d be right, but Apple doesn’t use PowerPC anymore. Nowadays they’re just using x86-hardware and the latest releases of Mac OS X even include an application called Boot Camp which let’s you install Windows on your Mac. This means Mac OS X and Windows can both run on the latest generations of Macs. This means Mac OS X and Linux are in the same position: Linux machines and Macs can both run Windows. So in your opinion developers should also stop porting games to the Mac, because it’s now possible for Mac users to run Windows. In your opinion Mac users don’t deserve a Mac version of the game. Why don’t they just install Windows and stfu?

There are people who don’t want to run people and who don’t want to support Microsoft. Why do developers spend time and money into making the game run on video cards from ati? The majority has a video card from nVidia. Why don’t those ati users just buy a video card from nVidia? Why do developers even develop a PC version? The console versions sell a lot more, so why don’t gamers just play all of their games on a console? Why do developers spend time to get controllers working on the PC version? Everyone’s got a keyboard and a mouse, so why don’t gamers just use a keyboard and a mouse to play games?

People want to play a game the way they like to play a game. That’s why games are released on more than one platform, a lot of hardware configurations are supported and a lot of input devices are supported. Some people prefer ati, others prefer nVidia. Some people prefer to use a controller, others prefer to use a keyboard and a mouse. Some people prefer to play on a console, others prefer to play on a PC. Some people prefer to use Linux or Mac OS X, others prefer to use Windows. Those playing on a console can play their games on the console of their choice. I’m a PC gamer and I want to play my games on the operating system I prefer (in my case the prefered operating systems are Mac OS X and Linux).

(Susefreak) #193

+1 for a Linux port.
+1 for a Mac OSX port.

I’ll keep my fingers crossed

(Adriano ML) #194

Just do it!

Overgrowth will have linux and macos
Natural Selection 2 may have linux and macos
Primal Carnage will have linux and macos
Aquaria will have linux and macos
Penumbra has linux and macos
Sevage 2 has linux and macos
World of Goo has linux and macos
Quake Live has linux and macos

Those are just major, recent events, but they did it. Even with their sparse budget, little time or even small fan-base.

And for those who doubt about this insignificant thing called Linux and Mac OS support:
http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/01/Why-you-should-use-OpenGL-and-not-DirectX

(aaa3) #195

[QUOTE=Joe999;205566]imo if some linux users don’t buy it because they refuse to perform the totally trival task of using a secondary os (an os on which the game runs) on the same machine, then they don’t deserve to play ANY game in the first place.[/QUOTE]do u know how horrendously and outrageously expensive is an original legit windows specimen (<–lol:D) ?
=O
ure like just seeing the price tag and can’t believe…
maybe its eastern europe only…

(Apples) #196

What? windows isnt free? j/k

Anyway, +1 for linux and mac port, even if I stick with windowzzz its nice to have the larger playerbase possible in any game.

As for linux vs windows trolling of the year, cuz yeah, its basically the biggest troll over the net (kinda like religion or political debate in family for xmas…), as someone mentionned its just diferent, but if you dont program or stuffs like that and you happy with windows, why would you switch just for the sake of saying out loud “I’m finaly a linux user yeepee!”?. Many friend of mine just get linux to say so, and they use it exclusively like they use windows… so whats the point? , Its kinda like everyone I see with a mac nowadays, and they dont even now how macos work, they just wanted the shiny apple on their computer cuz ya know, “it’s cool”.

OFC if you want a stable/fast OS and if you USE these capapbilities its nice to have linux

Anyway go go for more port!

Peace

(beneee) #197

+1 for Linux Port. ETQW runs very great for me on Ubuntu and i love my Ubuntu :slight_smile: A brand new Action Game that runs also on Linux definitly helps Linux become more popularity. For me Cross Platform is the better choice and not limited to one Operating System.

(Susefreak) #198

[QUOTE=Adriano ML;206468]Just do it!
And for those who doubt about this insignificant thing called Linux and Mac OS support:
http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/01/Why-you-should-use-OpenGL-and-not-DirectX[/QUOTE]

That link doesn’t advocate Linux/OSX use, it only tells you what the advantages are of OpenGL over DX-technologies. It only mentions the portability of the OpenGL technologies and the advantages of it, which include the portability of the code.

I’ve got high hopes of Brink being cross-platform since almost all idTech4 based games have been ported over (except for WolfenFail, which I am kinda glad that it didn’t see a port).

(DoubleDigit) #199

[QUOTE=Florisjuh;205585]
I guess the Linux and Windows models differ too greatly to make a fair comparison in terms of quality of releases. In a Linux distribution, you can fix the bugs yourself though, that’s a comfortable plus.[/QUOTE]

This is what I don’t get about you Linux users. You’re just like those mechanics that like to fiddle with their car all the time. A working reliable car is no good for them, because they constantly need to fix things. Guess that makes them important.

Welll, I don’t have time for that, I want and have a car that doesn’t broke down, I only put gas in it and do regular maintenance, I have it to go here and there quickly and without problems.
The same is with my choice of OS. I install it and do my job with it. I don’t have to fix issues, to constantly look for whatever new trick to enable this and that, complain that this is not available here or whatever. Why should I waste my time on something incomplete when a working solution is available?

(darthmob) #200

[QUOTE=DoubleDigit;207181]This is what I don’t get about you Linux users. You’re just like those mechanics that like to fiddle with their car all the time. A working reliable car is no good for them, because they constantly need to fix things. Guess that makes them important.[/QUOTE]It’s not a less reliable car just because you can fiddle with it. And fiddling can be rewarding and fun. To stay with cars: “Argh, that stupid indicator is beeping everytime I’m driving around a corner. Meh I don’t want to fiddle with that in case I break something and try to live with it instead even though it pisses me off” versus “Argh that stupid indicator is beeping everytime I’m driving around a corner. I’ll just unplug the speaker and now I can drive much more relaxed”. :wink: