Good Old Games

[BruceVC]

 

 

aw yisss.

 

I've never understood why people would want to play games on Linux when they can play on Windows, where is the real advantage with Linux?

 

For some people (/points to self) it's their preferred operating system.  I've been using Linux for over 10 years now.  The only reason I even have a Windows partition is for gaming, it's the only thing I ever boot into Windows for.  I like being able to surf the web without a virus protection program and not have to worry (though that will change if Linux ever becomes popular in the mainstream).  I like having a plethora of choices on what desktop environment to use (currently XFCE).  I like being able to tinker with the operating system to my heart's content and instead of having roadblocks thrown up in my face, I have tools readily available.  I like knowing my operating system will never cost me a red cent.

 

When I build my new rig later this year, it won't even have a Windows partition.  If a game won't have native Linux support I'll either have to run it through wine or (far more likely) I won't buy it at all.

 

 

Okay you make some good points, but I assume you wouldn't advocate Linux coexistence at the expense of PC gaming integration and advancement  from a development perspective ? 

 

 

where is the real advantage with Linux?

specifically for playing games? probably nowhere.

 

but maybe You can help me, because

i've never understood why people would want to play games on windows when they can play on linux.

 

 

Thats an easy one actually, Windows has more interoperability than Linux and more games and gaming paraphernalia is designed for Windows  than  for Linux

[sesobebo]

Thats an easy one actually, Windows has more interoperability than Linux and more games and gaming paraphernalia is designed for Windows  than  for Linux

yes, see, i understand why they have to play on windows, but i was asking why they would want to.

[Gfted1]

^Because there is "probably nowhere" advantage to playing on Linux, maybe?
 

[Keyrock]

 

 

 

aw yisss.

 

I've never understood why people would want to play games on Linux when they can play on Windows, where is the real advantage with Linux?

 

For some people (/points to self) it's their preferred operating system.  I've been using Linux for over 10 years now.  The only reason I even have a Windows partition is for gaming, it's the only thing I ever boot into Windows for.  I like being able to surf the web without a virus protection program and not have to worry (though that will change if Linux ever becomes popular in the mainstream).  I like having a plethora of choices on what desktop environment to use (currently XFCE).  I like being able to tinker with the operating system to my heart's content and instead of having roadblocks thrown up in my face, I have tools readily available.  I like knowing my operating system will never cost me a red cent.

 

When I build my new rig later this year, it won't even have a Windows partition.  If a game won't have native Linux support I'll either have to run it through wine or (far more likely) I won't buy it at all.

 

 

Okay you make some good points, but I assume you wouldn't advocate Linux coexistence at the expense of PC gaming integration and advancement  from a development perspective ? 

 

I'm not advocating anything to anyone.  Use whatever operating system your heart desires.  As for developers, the market tends to be what advocates what platforms they develop for.

[sesobebo]

^Because there is "[specifically for playing games] probably nowhere" advantage to playing on Linux, maybe?

 

 

please, don't shorten the quote, because You're likely to miss the point.

 

a valid (non-rethoric) question would be: "^Because there are disadvantages to playing on Linux, maybe?" to which the answer would be: "specifically for playing games? probably none." quakes, counter-strikes, dotas, kickastrters, all the other games, that work natively on multiple OSes - in general their functionality is so OS independent, that the dilemma can be boiled down to general OS prefference (or individual game cases).

 

which was kind of the point i was trying to get to, but had beaten about the bush a bit too much - the answer to BruceVC's question (and mine in return) would have nothing to do with games in general.

Edited March 18, 2014 by sesobebo

[Gfted1]

What?

[sesobebo]

What?

 

i've asked: "why would i want to play on windows if i can play on linux?"

 

You've answered with: "because there's no advantage to playing on linux."

this does not answer my question, because You haven't told me if there are any disadvantages to playing games on linux.

 

so i've asked myself: "are there any disatvantages to playing on linux?"

and also answered myself: "for games that work on both OSes there are none. the decision, what to play those games on therefore comes down to the general OS preference."

[Gfted1]

 

where is the real advantage with Linux?

specifically for playing games? probably nowhere.

 

but maybe You can help me, because

i've never understood why people would want to play games on windows when they can play on linux.

 

 

 

Thats an easy one actually, Windows has more interoperability than Linux and more games and gaming paraphernalia is designed for Windows  than  for Linux

yes, see, i understand why they have to play on windows, but i was asking why they would want to.

 

 

^Because there is "probably nowhere" advantage to playing on Linux, maybe?

 

What?

i've asked: "why would i want to play on windows if i can play on linux?"

 

You've answered with: "because there's no advantage to playing on linux."

this does not answer my question, because You haven't told me if there are any disadvantages to playing games on linux.

 

so i've asked myself: "are there any disatvantages to playing on linux?"

and also answered myself: "for games that work on both OSes there are none. the decision, what to play those games on therefore comes down to the general OS preference."

 

 

 

No. You asked why would "people" want to play on Windows. The answer being, if there is no advantage to playing on Linux why would anyone bother with it for gaming.

[Elerond]

There is disadvantages to play with linux, one for example is that you need to use linux

[melkathi]

The point is that there is no inherent benefit to playing on any OS. It doesn't matter if it is windows, mac or linux. If a game plays on it it plays. Windows is the mainstream OS so most games are made supporting that. It does not make Windows as an OS better suited for gaming, just so much more common among gamers, it makes economic sense for companies to bring out games for this OS, while not bothering with others. But it doesn't make the question "Why would anyone want to play on linux?" any more valid - if they run on linux, there is no advantage to not playing them on linux.

[Gfted1]

...if they run on linux, there is no advantage to not playing them on linux.

Except that the user would have to take extra steps to set up Linux on their PC? Once it becomes an out-of-the-box product, then Linux would offer no drawback. For example, I can get in my car and drive to the store or I can build my car and then drive to the store. Sure they both work but one method is more difficult and prone to mistake.

[Keyrock]

 

...if they run on linux, there is no advantage to not playing them on linux.

Except that the user would have to take extra steps to set up Linux on their PC? Once it becomes an out-of-the-box product, then Linux would offer no drawback. For example, I can get in my car and drive to the store or I can build my car and then drive to the store. Sure they both work but one method is more difficult and prone to mistake.

 

Some Linux distros like Ubuntu and Mint, for example, are damn near every bit as simple to install as Windows these days.  The only real extra step, if you're looking to game on Linux, is installing proprietary graphics drivers, which are not installed automatically due to licensing.  What that involves is enabling a repo and installing the drivers, which boils down to opening up a window, scrolling down, checking a box, and clicking on a button.  I'm going to go out on a limb and say that most people can handle that.

Edited March 18, 2014 by Keyrock

[melkathi]

 

...if they run on linux, there is no advantage to not playing them on linux.

Except that the user would have to take extra steps to set up Linux on their PC? Once it becomes an out-of-the-box product, then Linux would offer no drawback. For example, I can get in my car and drive to the store or I can build my car and then drive to the store. Sure they both work but one method is more difficult and prone to mistake.

 

And you continue missing the point. Maybe because you concentrate on a fragment of a sentence from a whole post.

Keyrock and other linux users are happy when they can play games on the OS they are already using. That they will not need a second OS just for part of their computer usage.

Bruce commented that he does not understand what the benefits of gaming on linux are, completly disregarding the simple fact: the benefit for linux users to be able to game on linux is that they'd be able to game on their chosen OS.

Nobody tells you to change OS. It is not a matter of either all games will be on windows or on linux. It is a matter of giving PC users a choice of what OS they wish to use. Nothing is gained by taking away choice from customers.

Someone who already uses linux gains nothing by having to swap to Windows for their gaming.

It is that simple.

That you or I do not use linux is irrelevant to that simple fact.

[samm]

Awesome Now that Valve has demonstrated great interest in Linux, Cryengine is (promised to be) working on Linux, both facts possibly attracting more high profile engines and games to be ported or developed for that OS, and generally more and more games are available from different store systems for it, I may not have to switch to Windows Teh Clowd Edition when the times comes where 7 is not a valid option anymore

[sesobebo]

No. You asked why would "people" want to play on Windows.

"i" or "people" - last time i've checked i was one of the pople. either way it doesn't make any difference for the sake of the argument; let's say i'm not presumptuous enough to answer in someone else's name, so i asked "why would i want to play on windows?"

 

 

...if they run on linux, there is no advantage to not playing them on linux.

Except that the user would have to take extra steps to set up Linux on their PC? Once it becomes an out-of-the-box product, then Linux would offer no drawback. For example, I can get in my car and drive to the store or I can build my car and then drive to the store. Sure they both work but one method is more difficult and prone to mistake.

 

you presume that everyone has windows installed, and no one has linux installed.

 

(also, you can get computers with linux pre-installed

 also #2, which OS is which in Your illustration? but before You answer that, think about why there are 3rd party application installers like this for windows, and why there are none for linux distributions.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is disadvantages to play with linux, one for example is that you need to use linux

0/5 - too blunt and obvious (:

You could learn from Gfted1; look, how craftily he's snuck the phrase "bother with [linux]" in there - as if it's a standard procedure!

if there is no advantage to playing on Linux why would anyone bother with it for gaming.

Edited March 18, 2014 by sesobebo

[Humanoid]

Maybe this reason has broader appeal: each of my future PCs might cost me $100 less without Windows.

[Gfted1]

~snip~

~snip~

Rofl. Perhaps you two should relax. I couldnt care less which OS anyone uses, or their skill level, or what market share Linux enjoys. I though we were having a simple conversation on why a user would choose Windows over Linux to game on and it is my opinion that ease of use is that reason. Nothing more, nothing less. Coming off as aggressive tools is bad form.

[sesobebo]

have i? i wasn't trying to. You might be reading too much into my post.

 

try reading them in Stephen Fry's voice.

[BruceVC]

~snip~

~snip~

Rofl. Perhaps you two should relax. I couldnt care less which OS anyone uses, or their skill level, or what market share Linux enjoys. I though we were having a simple conversation on why a user would choose Windows over Linux to game on and it is my opinion that ease of use is that reason. Nothing more, nothing less. Coming off as aggressive tools is bad form.

 

 

I work in the software industry, and I use to work for Microsoft,  and its funny how certain Linux and Unix fans are almost militant around there support for any platform outside of Windows. They seem to overlook the fact that for the majority of people the thought of installing Linux is a lot of hard work and they will battle to get decent support, warranties and some of there games and gaming hardware isn't even supported on Linux. Its fine if you personally know Linux and can effectively do your own troubleshooting but this isn't the case for most people

 

The main difference between Linux or Windows for customers is the ease of interoperability and Windows wins that easily. This shouldn't even be a point of contention. I am not suggesting that some people on these forums don't prefer Linux, I believe that. But if I was developer and I had a limited budget I would have to be seriously convinced to create a game that also supports Linux because it makes more financial sense to create games for the Windows market, I also don't see any gaming benefit from a Linux game around factors like graphic settings and the required hardware

[melkathi]

 Coming off as aggressive tools is bad form.

 

 

*sigh*

[marelooke]

 

 

~snip~

~snip~

Rofl. Perhaps you two should relax. I couldnt care less which OS anyone uses, or their skill level, or what market share Linux enjoys. I though we were having a simple conversation on why a user would choose Windows over Linux to game on and it is my opinion that ease of use is that reason. Nothing more, nothing less. Coming off as aggressive tools is bad form.

 

 

I work in the software industry, and I use to work for Microsoft,  and its funny how certain Linux and Unix fans are almost militant around there support for any platform outside of Windows. They seem to overlook the fact that for the majority of people the thought of installing Linux is a lot of hard work and they will battle to get decent support, warranties and some of there games and gaming hardware isn't even supported on Linux. Its fine if you personally know Linux and can effectively do your own troubleshooting but this isn't the case for most people

 

The main difference between Linux or Windows for customers is the ease of interoperability and Windows wins that easily. This shouldn't even be a point of contention. I am not suggesting that some people on these forums don't prefer Linux, I believe that. But if I was developer and I had a limited budget I would have to be seriously convinced to create a game that also supports Linux because it makes more financial sense to create games for the Windows market, I also don't see any gaming benefit from a Linux game around factors like graphic settings and the required hardware

 

Since you imply in your post that most of that also goes for non-gamers I'm sorry to say that that information is out of date as far as installation goes. Assuming you don't have weird hardware (and which "normal" end user has UltraSPARCs lying around?) GNU/Linux is generally *much* easier to install than Windows. The advantage Windows has in this arena is *only* the fact that it comes preinstalled on pretty much every preconfigured PC you could buy, which is a problem in and of itself.

 

How to install Linux: insert CD/DVD: click next next next. Done.

How to install Windows: insert CD/DVD: click next next next. Hunt down and install drivers, reboot 700 times. Install antivirus software. Find and install essential software (eg. Office suites etc, software to watch DVDs, burn CDs/DVDs etc etc)

 

Note that if you end up with unsupported hardware you're just as much out of luck on Windows as on Linux (great fun if you have an unsupported network card). Actually, chances are bigger your hardware will work on Linux due to the shorter release cycle, so drivers for new hardware get added much much faster than to a base Windows installation.

 

As far as support is concerned, I have no idea. But afaik you shouldn't look to MS for support as end-user (I don't know of anyone who has ever tried to get support from MS directly so it might be possible). I'd say that corporate support is irrelevant for end-users and that "some dude they know that knows" is usually how support is obtained.

 

Now, when it comes to gaming peripherals you could absolutely be right, I have no idea how well controllers work on Linux (I know they *do* work though as I was involved in the Linux Gametome when it still existed and some people's games used them). Since most controllers/joysticks etc are just USB devices I assume adding support wouldn't be hard. Stranger devices (throttles, motion sensors etc) are probably barely supported as of now, then again, once there's a use-case for them they'd be supported pretty quickly in my experience.

 

The one thing I will give you though that the faster development cycle of libraries on GNU/Linux system could well cause trouble for development teams unprepared for it. I've seen this with proprietary tools that hard link against specific glibc versions, breaking the entire application once the ABI changes. Dealing with this is going to be, I think, the biggest challenge.

 

No. You asked why would "people" want to play on Windows. The answer being, if there is no advantage to playing on Linux why would anyone bother with it for gaming.

The advantage of playing on Linux is performance. I remember back in the day when UT was first available on Linux (it was very easy to install btw) and performance was just *a lot* better than on the same machine running Windows.

 

I think much of the performance benefit *NIX systems have here comes from the file system. NTFS is *slow*. There's also less "bloat" running in the background in the system (though currently there's quite a movement to add more and more bloat to Linux, so that advantage seems to be fading, but I digress)

 

As for disadvantages: well, most GFX driver companies tend to spend more time optimizing their Windows drivers, so if the bottleneck is GFX performance Windows will probably score better, if it's IO or CPU your game might well run better on GNU/Linux.

 

 

Now all of that said, the convenience of installing games on Windows is currently still much greater (I don't run Ubuntu, so getting Steam to work is still painful for now*) something that will most likely change since both Valve as well as GOG have set their eyes on supporting Linux.

 

*of course, if there ever is support for enough games that I want to play I might very well replace said Windows partition with an Ubuntu one, just for gaming.

[Nonek]

Nothing wrong with Microsoft having a little competition in my view.

[bonarbill]

 

~snip~

~snip~

Rofl. Perhaps you two should relax. I couldnt care less which OS anyone uses, or their skill level, or what market share Linux enjoys. I though we were having a simple conversation on why a user would choose Windows over Linux to game on and it is my opinion that ease of use is that reason. Nothing more, nothing less. Coming off as aggressive tools is bad form.

 

 

I work in the software industry, and I use to work for Microsoft,  and its funny how certain Linux and Unix fans are almost militant around there support for any platform outside of Windows. They seem to overlook the fact that for the majority of people the thought of installing Linux is a lot of hard work and they will battle to get decent support, warranties and some of there games and gaming hardware isn't even supported on Linux. Its fine if you personally know Linux and can effectively do your own troubleshooting but this isn't the case for most people

 

The main difference between Linux or Windows for customers is the ease of interoperability and Windows wins that easily. This shouldn't even be a point of contention. I am not suggesting that some people on these forums don't prefer Linux, I believe that. But if I was developer and I had a limited budget I would have to be seriously convinced to create a game that also supports Linux because it makes more financial sense to create games for the Windows market, I also don't see any gaming benefit from a Linux game around factors like graphic settings and the required hardware

 

 

 

If you were a developer that had a limited budget, you would most likely be using a low cost engine like Unity or Mono, which has multiplatform support right out of the gate.  It only takes 5 minutes to import your game to Linux.   Many developer that I talked too said that they actually made extra profits from porting their games to make and linux.  This is why I believe it's important to use a multiplatform engine from the start, because it makes porting simple.  This is pretty big reason why Crytek added Linux support to their engine.

 

Also, as a software developer myself, I can actually confirm that the huge benefit for making games on Linux is it's easier to port games to the PS4.  The last game we worked on only took a few days to port because Linux shares some similarities to the PS4's operating system (which is based on FreeBSD, a fork of Linux).

Edited March 19, 2014 by bonarbill

[Keyrock]

Really, it all comes down to the unknown.  Windows is like a long term relationship.  Even if the relationship has been bad at times, people are scared of change because Windows is all they've known for so long.  As far as hardware, pretty much all common hardware (and most uncommon hardware) is supported "out of the box".  As far as gaming peripherals go, your typical peripherals work just fine, as I can attest to with my 360 controller and Thrustmaster Flightstick.  More niche and specialized peripherals may not have the same level of support on Linux at this time.  They will likely still work, but may not have some of the same fine tuning capabilities that come with applications written by the manufacturer.  If Linux gains traction, naturally greater hardware (and software) support will follow.  I would guess critical mass would be around 10% market share (Linux is around 1-2% on desktops now I think, via browsing statistics, which isn't exactly an exact science).

 

 

The last game  we worked on only took a few days to port because Linux shares some similarities to the PS4's operating system (which is based on FreeBSD, a fork of Linux).

 

That's not entirely correct.  Both Linux and FreeBSD are based on Unix, different flavors of Unix (Linux was based on MINIX, while FreeBSD was, as the name implies, based on Berkeley Software Distribution).  Through POSIX compliance, which, to the best of my knowledge, both Linux and *BSD still strive for, there are a lot of similarities between the systems.

 

As an aside, I believe Mac OSX is based off Unix also, though I forget which flavor of Unix.

Edited March 19, 2014 by Keyrock

[Malcador]

I've never understood why people would want to play games on Linux when they can play on Windows, where is the real advantage with Linux?

Really ? Maybe they really like Linux as their primary OS and would like to avoid dual-booting or needing another Windows box ? Seems the advantage for these people lies outside of gaming.

 

Good to hear GOG's offering Linux support.