AMD/ATi + Blizzard

[sundown]

I read this comment for Diablo 3 at dailytech:

"Now ATI is collaborating with Blizzard for better game support on the HD48xx and Blizzard announces the use of Havok which ATI is implementing, it will be an even better choice to buy ATI!"

I don't know how true this is, but can't AMD/ATi push a little bit more Blizzard/Vivendi into make the game a native Linux game, now that AMD/ATi has a sudden interest in Linux :D ?

It's funny how they can't realize the money they are losing here.

[Aradreth]

I read this comment for Diablo 3 at dailytech:

"Now ATI is collaborating with Blizzard for better game support on the HD48xx and Blizzard announces the use of Havok which ATI is implementing, it will be an even better choice to buy ATI!"

I don't know how true this is, but can't AMD/ATi push a little bit more Blizzard/Vivendi into make the game a native Linux game, now that AMD/ATi has a sudden interest in Linux :D ?

It's funny how they can't realize the money they are losing here.
Actually it's quite sad because when developing it they will most probably have an in house linux version like they did with WOW.

6:41pm CEST: Q: Wil there be Linux support? What are the barriers? A: We have no immediate plans for support of Linux client. We had a Linux version early on for compatiability purposes, but have no plans to make the final game for Linux.
full interview here (http://www.wowinsider.com/2008/06/28/wwi-08-notes-from-the-qanda-dev-panel/)

[Michael]

For what it's worth, there has been a Blizzard employee with the ATI Linux beta program now for some time at least.

[d2kx]

I really don't understand why they don't just release the WoW Linux client (unsupported, if they want)... work already been done, community would love it, game with 10.000.000 players of which they will be at least some thousand Linux gamers...

[Thetargos]

I really don't understand why they don't just release the WoW Linux client (unsupported, if they want)... work already been done, community would love it, game with 10.000.000 players of which they will be at least some thousand Linux gamers...
Somewhere in the order of about 100K according to some figures, for WoW alone.

Michael, if that is indeed true (and having into account, again, that one of their Lead Software Engineers pioneered SDL), that is the more feasible. If there is one other company I'd LOVE to see their games on Linux, that'd be Blizzard. Forget Valve, forget 3D Realms, forget BioWare, even... The kind of stuff that Blizzard could bring to the table is just... amazing... In my utopian world they'd also release the code for the Warcraft II, Diablo and Starcraft engines, so that there could be Linux binaries for these games (you'd still had to have the original title to play these), alas... Not very likely to happen... ever.

At any rate, I'd love to see at least Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 native Linux clients.

[Vighy]

Mhh I'd like to have the sources of Warcraft™ to be able to add the facilities of Warcraft2 (mouse right button) and to make graphics better, keeping the game as it is... since I think it was the most wonderful game I ever played :D

And Diablo3 native in linux will be worth buying it :D :D

So, a better linux / open source support from Blizzard will be much welcome :D

but I'm not that confident in it.

[RobbieAB]

Somewhere in the order of about 100K according to some figures, for WoW alone.

Problem: The most telling figures are the demise of Loki and the problems LGP are facing.

If there were 100K linux gamers willing to pay, we would already have a vibrant games set-up, as that many sales would probably have kept Loki alive. No offence to LGP, but Lokis game lineup was decidely superior.

Even worse: you mention 100K potential customers, and the price of rights for games goes up. You can't sell a Linux port to any company as having 100K potential customers, and than argue that the rights should be cheap because you can't expect more than 10K sales!

[Svartalf]

I really don't understand why they don't just release the WoW Linux client (unsupported, if they want)... work already been done, community would love it, game with 10.000.000 players of which they will be at least some thousand Linux gamers...

Publisher nixed it. It wasn't up to them.

[Svartalf]

If there were 100K linux gamers willing to pay, we would already have a vibrant games set-up, as that many sales would probably have kept Loki alive. No offence to LGP, but Lokis game lineup was decidely superior.

Heh... There's some reason behind the lineup deltas. Loki scoring what it did how it did and then owing people LOTS of cash for the deals they wrangled causes an environment worse than when Loki was around- they muddied the waters for everyone that followed them in that respect.


Even worse: you mention 100K potential customers, and the price of rights for games goes up. You can't sell a Linux port to any company as having 100K potential customers, and than argue that the rights should be cheap because you can't expect more than 10K sales!

Got it in one! ;) Now, if you KNOW you can expect 20k units out of that potential market, you can live with the deal to wrangle the rights from someone like Blizzard (or Id, or...). You might even have the money backing however it comes to actually ADVERTISE the silly thing at that level. But, sadly, we aren't seeing this story, now are we?

[Thetargos]

In the case of Blizzard, I don't think that they may be intrinsically hostile towards Linux as such (due to sales fears), but rather due to their publishers (and more so being now owned by Vivendi-Universal) who have been openly hostile towards Linux.

Edit

I don't believe that a company such as Blizzard would have many problems with regards to potential customers. Their games are virtually instant hits.

[Svartalf]

In the case of Blizzard, I don't think that they may be intrinsically hostile towards Linux as such (due to sales fears), but rather due to their publishers (and more so being now owned by Vivendi-Universal) who have been openly hostile towards Linux.


Yep. At one point they were openly hostile towards us but that mellowed over time along with them picking up some key people who're Linux friendly (Heh...Sam Lantiga, amongst others...). It's more the publishers that're doing the, "Linux version? No. Way." play here- and we're seeing it a bit more often.


I don't believe that a company such as Blizzard would have many problems with regards to potential customers. Their games are virtually instant hits.


Depends on the metrics they use. If they believe at least 10-20k units will sell and it's not going to be problematic to make a cross-platform engine and won't cost them more than maybe 2% extra time and overhead, then they'll do it. If the effort's bigger or the numbers look smaller, it's a much rougher sell for them.

[me262]

In the case of Blizzard, I don't think that they may be intrinsically hostile towards Linux as such (due to sales fears), but rather due to their publishers (and more so being now owned by Vivendi-Universal) who have been openly hostile towards Linux.

I don't believe that a company such as Blizzard would have many problems with regards to potential customers. Their games are virtually instant hits.
You mean Activision. They recently bought Vivendi.

Blizzard definitely isn't hostile if they made a early linux client. In fact WoW supports OpenGL, and that's the beginning. Blizzard does work with the Transgaming developers, so the "want to" is there. Take a look at how many Blizzard games run with Wine/Cedega (What's that? All of them?)

Hopefully Activision is more friendly to the Linux cause.

[Thetargos]

You mean Activision. They recently bought Vivendi.
Now those are some news, indeed! Activision is also the publisher of choice for id and they don't mind them releasing their games commercially for Linux (nor their engines as GPL code)


Blizzard definitely isn't hostile if they made a early linux client. In fact WoW supports OpenGL, and that's the beginning. Blizzard does work with the Transgaming developers, so the "want to" is there. Take a look at how many Blizzard games run with Wine/Cedega (What's that? All of them?)
Actually Blizzard has been adding OpenGL render paths to their games, not out of "portability" as such, but rather for the Mac market, which they consider to be much bigger than Linux is (my only concern being that for most American companies some times the "world" is located between the Great Lakes and the Big River; and between the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, sometimes the northern border moves up to the Yukon, though).



It is undeniable that there are markets where Linux is much stronger than what it is in the American contient: Europe and China are two big and reacurring examples, but there's also other markets like India and some Latin American countries with developing economies. IMO the biggest problem with Linux-related software is the fact that Linux users are regarded most of the time as ungrateful bastards who want it all for Free (as in beer... perfect example of the abiguity of the term in colloquial English)... And as demonstrated by the motivation behind why LGP is incorporating DRM in their latest games, some users actually confirm these worst fears of Linux users being a bunch of pirates, and Open Source being a means to violate IP.



Hopefully Activision is more friendly to the Linux cause.

There has been a record of gmes originally published by them that DO have Linux ports (id games like Quake & Doom series, Raven games like RTCW, SoF, Quake IV, etc.

Now I was looking for some information about this news of Vivendi and Activision, and it would seem as if Vivendi actually bought out Activision (or a big chunk of it, and called for merger)... This doesn't necessarily looks good towards Linux support in the future from the new venture called Activision Blizzard

Ohh, I almost forgot about this Blog post: link (http://blog.gameshadow.com/?p=92)

[me262]

It is undeniable that there are markets where Linux is much stronger than what it is in the American contient: Europe and China are two big and reacurring examples, but there's also other markets like India and some Latin American countries with developing economies. IMO the biggest problem with Linux-related software is the fact that Linux users are regarded most of the time as ungrateful bastards who want it all for Free (as in beer... perfect example of the abiguity of the term in colloquial English)... And as demonstrated by the motivation behind why LGP is incorporating DRM in their latest games, some users actually confirm these worst fears of Linux users being a bunch of pirates, and Open Source being a means to violate IP.

Now I was looking for some information about this news of Vivendi and Activision, and it would seem as if Vivendi actually bought out Activision (or a big chunk of it, and called for merger)... This doesn't necessarily looks good towards Linux support in the future from the new venture called Activision Blizzard
That is slightly disturbing. I guess we'll see when iD releases Quake 5. Then again from the blog post "Blizzard isn't easily swayed", so I'd think if Blizzard really wanted to do it, Activision Blizzard may let them.

I do find it odd that it's the other way around. Activision has been around for way to long to let that happen. I remember when they split from Atari! It's probably the reason Vivendi let them keep the name actually.

While I do appreciate the free software, I do recognise the need to keep some software under wraps. When I get into game design, I'll be the same way, because releasing the code just allows for other people to make their own forks (look at how many there are for Q1 and Q2!), meaning the forks have to change their netcode around, or people can cheat with a modified program. There's also the copy protection issue though, and I think the license key works well for online, but it's inadequate. There needs to be some kind of new optical media that can be tested for authenticity, but whenever there's protection, there's always someone that breaks it.
Being seen as ungrateful, hackers, and people who want everything for free. There are people like that, but it's a stereotype in my eyes. I certainly don't fit that profile. Most people that play commercial games don't.

"As far as I'm concerned, we paid for it, it's ours to f*** with." (Author Unknown)

[Svartalf]

Now those are some news, indeed! Activision is also the publisher of choice for id and they don't mind them releasing their games commercially for Linux (nor their engines as GPL code)


Heh... Are YOU going to tell one of the mainline Independent studios that can self-publish if they so saw fit, take it to ANY publisher they see fit to do so, that they CAN'T do what they've done? I wouldn't, even if I was Vivendi. It's just not a good thing to do.

[Svartalf]

Being seen as ungrateful, hackers, and people who want everything for free. There are people like that, but it's a stereotype in my eyes. I certainly don't fit that profile. Most people that play commercial games don't.

"As far as I'm concerned, we paid for it, it's ours to f*** with." (Author Unknown)

Heh... Guess what...that's what they view us as. That's WHY we have some of the issues that we do finding people willing to give us commercial games. When you have more pirated copies of LGP titles than they've sold, it confirms that in their minds.

[Thetargos]

Heh... Are YOU going to tell one of the mainline Independent studios that can self-publish if they so saw fit, take it to ANY publisher they see fit to do so, that they CAN'T do what they've done? I wouldn't, even if I was Vivendi. It's just not a good thing to do.

I know, what I meant (before I read how was the whole deal) was that if several of these studios under the same roof could take the hint from those other bigger studios and experiment with Linux releases and stuff... Seeing as how the deal was played out, I seriously doubt it that even if one such [independent] studio did so, they'd still block it all the same (like they did with Blizzard... And look who is it we're talking about! Alas, Blizzard is "property" of Vivendi, and now with its new name will have even greater exposure and presure)

[me262]

Alas, Blizzard is "property" of Vivendi, and now with its new name will have even greater exposure and pressure)
I think Vivendi is just the publisher, otherwise we would have been seeing a Vivendi Universal logo in the company movies, instead of an inconspicuous spot on the box.

[Thetargos]

I think Vivendi is just the publisher, otherwise we would have been seeing a Vivendi Universal logo in the company movies, instead of an inconspicuous spot on the box.

Not according to Vivendi (http://www.vivendi.com/corp/en/group/profile.php), however Blizzard's own profile (http://www.blizzard.com/us/inblizz/profile.html) would suggest otherwise. Strange.

[sundown]

What happened to the possiblity that Mark Shuttelworth will try to push Blizzard into doing their games for Linux?

[yoshi314]

We had a Linux version early on for compatiability purposes, but have no plans to make the final game for Linux.
that sucks. as usual game gets developed on linux/unix and ported to windows :/ ( i believe most id games were developed on unix and then initially released for windows ). blizzard might be concerned about copy protection issues on linux and the fact that the os is a fluid platform (frequent api changes etc), where windows provides more stable ground.

but if it comes to online gaming most money comes from monthly account fees, not from the actual game sales.

i can think of one huge advantage of linux based game - you can box it together with an operating system :]

think about it - if there was a linux edition of e.g. world of warcraft or warcraft 3 with a linux (e.g ubuntu) install cd in the box, or even blizzard's dedicated distro. wouldn't that be cool?

[RobbieAB]

think about it - if there was a linux edition of e.g. world of warcraft or warcraft 3 with a linux (e.g ubuntu) install cd in the box, or even blizzard's dedicated distro. wouldn't that be cool?

What about the other software many gamers would run in the background? like the Voice Chat?

Admittedly, this could offer major benefits for them in terms of debugging: We provide a LiveCD to run the game for users, if the problem doesn't occur there, it's not our problem... :D

I don't think that many "casual" gamers would be willing to reboot for a game though, and the hardcore would complain about lack of functionality.

[RobbieAB]

Not according to Vivendi (http://www.vivendi.com/corp/en/group/profile.php), however Blizzard's own profile (http://www.blizzard.com/us/inblizz/profile.html) would suggest otherwise. Strange.

Companies try to claim rights where they don't have any, publishers well known for this trick. Disney famously lost a case in the UK for that: Peter Pans Toyshop, who they were suing for infringing their IP won expenses after legal representation was made to the court on behalf of the Great Ormonde Street Hospital that payment had been made for use of the said IP, which they owned in perpetuity courtesy of an Act of Parliment.

I would put more trust in Blizzards claim.

[Svartalf]

that sucks. as usual game gets developed on linux/unix and ported to windows :/ ( i believe most id games were developed on unix and then initially released for windows ). blizzard might be concerned about copy protection issues on linux and the fact that the os is a fluid platform (frequent api changes etc), where windows provides more stable ground.


The protection issues are a valid concern. With an apparent three or four to one ratio of infringed to legitimate copies in the wild of many of LGP's titles fuels that fire.

The API changes, etc. are not a concern, but more of a perception- honest.

The Windows world isn't any less stable (With deltas in DirectX each time you turn around, requiring almost always a complete re-write if you want to use the new one... Deltas between behaviors in 98, Me, 2000, XP, Vista... It's not that we change all that much (Honestly, if done right, your binaries can still run nearly 6-10 years from now as long as the ABI below you doesn't break. The same can't be said as much for Windows titles... ;) )- it's that they're FAMILIAR with the Windows world. It is a known. Linux is not.

[Malikith]

I don't think that many "casual" gamers would be willing to reboot for a game though, and the hardcore would complain about lack of functionality.

Well, most casual gamers are console gamers and when they want to play a different game, they technically have to "reboot" too hehe. But yeah, the technical crowd might complain, might not though either, if there are other options that is.

[Malikith]

The protection issues are a valid concern. With an apparent three or four to one ratio of infringed to legitimate copies in the wild of many of LGP's titles fuels that fire.

The API changes, etc. are not a concern, but more of a perception- honest.

The Windows world isn't any less stable (With deltas in DirectX each time you turn around, requiring almost always a complete re-write if you want to use the new one... Deltas between behaviors in 98, Me, 2000, XP, Vista... It's not that we change all that much (Honestly, if done right, your binaries can still run nearly 6-10 years from now as long as the ABI below you doesn't break. The same can't be said as much for Windows titles... ;) )- it's that they're FAMILIAR with the Windows world. It is a known. Linux is not.

Yeah alot of these game companies are like children who are afraid of the dark. Or a better way of saying it, vampires who are afraid of the light haha. I understand they want to protect their investments and everything, and with how crucial things are at the moment. The point that needs to get across to Linux users pirating LGP games is that if you don't want to buy it, thats fine but don't pirate it because that makes everyone including LGP look like a bunch of thieves which is not true at all. Game companies want reasons so they don't have to port to Linux, and the more reasons they have, the more they'll resist. We gotta take away these reasons, even if they're not valid in realistic terms but they are valid in their business terms.

[me262]

that sucks. as usual game gets developed on linux/unix and ported to windows :/ ( i believe most id games were developed on unix and then initially released for windows ). blizzard might be concerned about copy protection issues on linux and the fact that the os is a fluid platform (frequent api changes etc), where windows provides more stable ground.
Granted there are a few things that emerge for backward compatibility's sake. Take libstdc++-3.3 for instance. Backward compatibility for programs built with GCC 3.3. Don't know any programs that use it, but I'm sure they're closed source, and binary-only.

think about it - if there was a linux edition of e.g. world of warcraft or warcraft 3 with a linux (e.g ubuntu) install cd in the box, or even blizzard's dedicated distro. wouldn't that be cool?
Double-edged sword here.
Pros:
- Static programs make supporting debugging easier (no messing with multiple versions.
- LiveCD - Be able to boot to the CD directly, making it very lightweight, very efficient. No WindowManager or Desktop system to get in the way. xstart --display :0 /usr/bin/War3
Cons:
- LiveCD UPDATES! Unless you want to press 100,000+ CD's everytime you update your program, the only other option is a UDF DVD-R (or RW), or release an ISO online... (This may work if the distro doesn't come with any programs)
- You still have to be able to support a multitude of hardware, meaning they have to tinker with the kernel / modules / dependencies everytime someone reports a problem.
- You're also at the mercy of what equipment works. "Why don't I have wireless access?" "Do you have a card with a (chipset that doesn't work *AHEM* TI *AHEM!*) chipset?" "Yeah!" "Sorry, you're screwed."

For the record though, BlizzardOS running IceWM does have a ring to it...

[me262]

Or a better way of saying it, vampires who are afraid of the light haha.
Oooh. I like that one...

I understand they want to protect their investments and everything, and with how crucial things are at the moment. The point that needs to get across to Linux users pirating LGP games is that if you don't want to buy it, thats fine but don't pirate it because that makes everyone including LGP look like a bunch of thieves which is not true at all. Game companies want reasons so they don't have to port to Linux, and the more reasons they have, the more they'll resist. We gotta take away these reasons, even if they're not valid in realistic terms but they are valid in their business terms.
Shall we start porting Starforce 4 anyone? :D
The reason there's so much piracy, is that no protection software existed for it, short of LGP's new online system.
(To my knowledge...)

A few other alternatives I can think of
- A "shareware" version of the game: This can access only a few single levels, crippled multi and online play (can't leave people COMPLETELY out of having a party with friends...) once someone purchases a key, integrate it into the program file or in an encrypted archive, and validate it when multiplayer and online functions are used.
- Some checking mechanism in the kernel that will see the medium for what it is, a CD-R, DVD-R, or loopmount (regardless of the book-type).
- Outside sector hashing: I remember reading that some of these commercial programs can put a crippled copy in the real spot, and the correct program in an outside section. Dummy program hashes and signature checks the correct program, once validated, runs.

Have I given LGP any ways of implementation yet? ;)

[Extreme Coder]

I'm not sure why Blizzard should be afraid of porting WoW for example. I mean, how the hell do you pirate a paid-for MMORPG?

[me262]

The fact that there's 3rd party server software circling is kind of a sticking point. I tried it at one point. Buggy scripting...
Naturally this 3rd party software, I'm thinking it's for professional clans and the like...

But the fact that it is a pay-for-play does make sense. There's no CD needed at all after it's installed.

[Thetargos]

I'm not sure why Blizzard should be afraid of porting WoW for example. I mean, how the hell do you pirate a paid-for MMORPG?

How long before, like Anarchy On Line they start offering the program for free and only charge for the monthly fee, at a hefty discount, of course?

[sundown]

............
AMD and Blizzard Entertainment® Join Forces in Strategic Global Agreement

-- Collaboration helps ensure rich experience for World of Warcraft® gamers playing on new AMD ATI Radeon™ HD 4800 series graphics cards--

SUNNYVALE, Calif. -- August 12, 2008 --AMD (NYSE: AMD) today announced that it has entered into an agreement with Blizzard Entertainment® that will allow AMD to bundle Blizzard's best games across all ATI Radeon™ graphics products, to deliver a superior gaming experience. As the exclusive graphics sponsor for BlizzCon™ 2008 in Anaheim, Oct. 10-11, AMD will treat gamers to the unparalleled graphics capabilities of the ATI Radeon™ HD 4800 series in all PCs for game play at BlizzCon™.

"Blizzard Entertainment is responsible for the hottest titles in PC gaming and AMD is excited to be working closely with one of the top development teams in the industry to deliver exceptional gaming experiences for players around the world," said Rick Bergman, senior vice president and general manager, Graphics Products, AMD. "Gamers have a variety of choices when it comes to graphics cards, and those who choose ATI Radeon solutions can be confident their purchase will give them the visually rich, high-performance experience they expect."

"Our collaboration with AMD is especially important to us because it provides us with early access to some of the latest graphics technology," said Paul Sams, chief operating officer of Blizzard Entertainment. "Delivering a polished game experience is one of our top priorities, and this relationship helps us achieve that goal for Blizzard gamers who choose AMD graphics cards."

AMD is committed to helping PC gamers around the world enjoy The Ultimate Visual Experience™. The collaboration with Blizzard Entertainment underscores the mission of its recently announced AMD GAME! initiative, which is dedicated to providing consumers the information they need to help them better understand gaming technology and thus purchase the right systems and components they need to best meet their high-definition gaming needs.