Thx for the replay, but I have to say that I'm not really happy about the content :/ Don't really need 2nd copy of the game
The problem with all of that is that the studio and original publisher aren't the ones making the game, Tares. If it were like Id or Epic where they're releasing the Linux version on their own (well, with prior titles from Epic- we still don't have UT3...) this all worked the way you wanted.
In the case of Sacred Gold, you're buying it from a completely different publisher, which has to collect royalties for the stuff that you're wanting to play. I'm sorry you don't want to buy a second copy, but with the way this game is getting to you, you're going to have to buy one if you want to run it natively on Linux.
As an aside, while I can sympathize with your desire to not buy a new copy of the game, if you don't, you're one less sales number. One less sales number on any given native title is a vote for something else or for some other OS. When you run Windows titles, you're voting to have MORE Windows titles. When you run under WINE, you're furthering a network effect that perpetuates not having native binary games on Linux. While I won't tell people to NOT run under WINE or buy Windows titles, I want to have people realize what precisely they're doing and to give them the info to make a more informed decision.
Me, I've pretty much walked away from the Windows space. I largely buy Windows titles for evaluation for porting prospects- and I've only bought in recent times the very title we're discussing.
When a game works with wine, I would not buy it a second time. I really like the wine project, it is improving well. It can not be used for every app/game, but for the ones which work you really don't need to reboot anymore.
I get the point here, but Sacred is quite old game. I bought it for like 5$ and now if I would like to play it natively I would had to spend like 40 bucks just for that ? If that would be Sacred 2 and the price would be like 60$ or more I would'nt even make a fuss ;-)
Because of the reduced price with the time it is muss less likely for UT3 to get a Linux version later - a budget title with Linux support does not create so much extra profit as when you can sell it directly in the first month. For this game you must be a real fan to buy it twice as there is no free patch. The best should be always a Linux variant combined with the Win version on the same install media or maybe released shortly after it as free download. I highly doubt that so many will buy an old game now.
Because of the reduced price with the time it is muss less likely for UT3 to get a Linux version later - a budget title with Linux support does not create so much extra profit as when you can sell it directly in the first month.
I have the same thoughts. Bought UT3 long time ago, but I have say that I play it rarely cause it lacks linux client.
Originally Posted by Kano
For this game you must be a real fan to buy it twice as there is no free patch. The best should be always a Linux variant combined with the Win version on the same install media or maybe released shortly after it as free download. I highly doubt that so many will buy an old game now.
I couldn't agree more. That's why I mentioned Sacred 2.
I couldn't agree more. That's why I mentioned Sacred 2.
Here's an observation for you and Kano.
If you don't buy Sacred, you might find that there will be no Sacred2.
As an insider in the periphery of the Game Industry, I can tell you all
right here, right now- it's about sales numbers. When you choose to run a Windows title, no matter what the reason, under WINE, you're
making a vote for MORE Windows titles. It's passably okay to do this
if you're unable to get a Linux version of a title; it's not so good
if you can get one. Why?
Well... With the same mentality that you and Kano espouse, we are in the current sad state of affairs we're in with native Linux games.
What do I mean by this?
Let me spin you back in time; an important year and month for Linux- and largely every person that claims to be a Linux user at that time
let us down.
December 1999. Quake 3 Arena is going to be released. Simultaneously for Windows, MacOS, AND Linux. Going to be in the stores with all SKUs for all three OSes. Loki Entertainment Software's
CEO makes some very, very stupid mistakes and delays the release of
the official Linux version by 6 weeks. Id, true to their word, offered
a download that "patched" a Windows or MacOS version to Linux or one
of the other OS platforms, using the game data from the installed
game to move it over. Rather than waiting, the bulk of the community
at large bought the Windows SKU (which counts as a Windows
sale and install, not a Linux one- keep that solidly in mind...) and
the Linux version sold some 100-200 copies total.
Each time someone goes and tries to get rights to make a Linux version
of some title, the publisher points to THOSE figures.
How does this equate to what I've told you up to this point? Sales numbers.
Sales numbers are what publishers and studios go by. They don't care.
what the "installed base" of an OS is- they care about whether they
can make money out of doing something (funny that...). When you
choose to run via WINE, you send the message that Windows sells.
When you choose to not buy a Linux version for whatever reason, you
send a message that Linux isn't going to make them any money.
Right now, it will take at least another 2-3 years of stuff from MS
floundering and people migrating from Windows to something else to
get the studios to start looking elsewhere for sales. With the mixed
bag of sales numbers, unless Valve does carry through with Steam and
Source for Linux so that the numbers are a bit more real (and it's
an easier sell for making a Linux version- doesn't cost as much to
deliver for the large part...) then it's at least another 2-3 years
past THAT before they'll start honestly giving us the time of day
without buying what is available right now. Honest.
Now, some may say, "well, you're affiliated with LGP, you're going to
try to get people to buy that..."- to this, I am going to point out
that I never touched the source code for Sacred and I'll never see a
dime out of the sales of that title. What are you buying when you buy
a game you liked, but already have the title for Windows? Well, other
than the extra copy of things, you're buying sales numbers. Break-even
sales numbers is a counter point to the abysmal numbers Q3:A did and
when a studio or publisher flings that in LGP or Runesoft's faces,
they can turn around and push a good figure back at them. In this case,
the rights access to Sacred2 is partly hinging on what the sales do
for Sacred Gold. There's other stuff at stake, that I'm privy to, but
can't disclose because of NDA.
Keep in mind, I am not proposing that you have to buy it. I'm handing
you a bit of information so that you know precisely what you're doing
when you make your choices.