06-05-2009, 10:45 AM
Originally Posted by Apopas
The Linux clients for UT were all paid for by Epic. Orignal UT client came out quite a while after the game. Clients for 2003/2004 were on the same disk as the Windows client.
UT3 has been either been work in porgress or stuck in a legal limbo for quite a while.
06-05-2009, 10:49 AM
So what Loki had to do with UT? They made just the update?
06-05-2009, 10:58 AM
Loki AFAIK had nothing to do with UT. Epic have contracted Icculus to do the UT3 port, I can't remember who did the other two (may have been internal to Epic). ALl the financial risk and investment of the port is with Epic.
Originally Posted by Apopas
Loki had a contract with Id to produce a Linux version of Q3A with Loki bearing an amount of the risk. I'm not too sure of the exact relationship between Loki and Id but it seems to have been somewhere between the Icculus/Epic and LGP/whoever relationships. Contractual stuff like that just makes my eyes glaze over so I can't be precise. It has been discussed several times before on here though.
06-05-2009, 11:09 AM
I'm asking coz Loki has UT in its products.
Anyway, a game that is in the list and I believe would be very succesful is Drakensang, because:
i) It's new with great graphics.
ii) Doesn't play well under Wine.
iii) RPGs aren't common in Linux but they have a very viable market.
iv) It's unique in its kind because it uses a great system we haven't seen in computer RPGs for over 12 years.
v) This system is Germany's child and very succesful there and Germany is a big Linux market.
vi) The company behind it isn't big.
06-05-2009, 11:15 AM
Originally Posted by Svartalf
I am really suprised caster is doing well i saw the video and was not overly impressed, perhaps i should re-evaluate that one glad to hear you will be doing more indie games i really like world of goo and rain slick precipes of darkness which are both great indie games in fact world of goo is my favourite bought linux game, i also purchased x3 but not really played it yet to busy working through sacred.
I am suprised people dont get the native versions if i have bought a game and like it i will get the native version for better performance when available and because games can break with different versions of games.
been avoiding windows games as much as possible probably make an exception for guild wars 2 though only because i got so into the game.
06-05-2009, 11:18 AM
Originally Posted by Apopas
So it is .. I had no recollection that it was them. Such a long time ago, and I have difficulty remembering last week.
06-05-2009, 04:58 PM
06-05-2009, 05:22 PM
There seems to be very little incentive to port existing games. However, one of these days an industry player is going to release a AAA title with Ubuntu support on the same level as Windows support, from day one. And they're going to clean up.
Originally Posted by djack
If you're a Linux games player and you've got a choice between buying a AAA title that'll only play in WINE and a AAA title that plays natively, which are you going to buy? If you're the managing director of an industry player, would you want the company selling the multi-platform game to be you, or your competitor? There will come a point in the future when the big houses find they have a choice to make: support Linux or lose out.
This goes back to collecting WINE stats, which would be a great idea. I wonder if Valve haven't already been doing this what with the native-Linux reverberations around Steam recently. It might well be that Valve are the company to clean up.
06-05-2009, 05:45 PM
Originally Posted by L33F3R
1) If you can't compare what you're doing with your "competition"...
2) I didn't BUY the game with the intent of playing it on WINE. It was a damned gift from my brother back when the game came out (Do the math on the release dates, L33F3R...)
3) It's been quite a while since I've played it at all. It's sitting on my HD, unused. I've been playing things like Sacred, Uplink, Prey, Caster... You get the idea.
4) In comparison, it doesn't work as desired- it's a make-do that I admit to so that there's little question that I've tried it.
The only thing cold here is the person making drug analogies and calling the other person "cold" without knowing the whole story. By the by, I don't tell them not to- I tell them that it's not the answer, which it isn't.
It doesn't help you get Linux gaming if you're playing something like WoW on it. It doesn't help you if you're playing Crysis on it. If you've got an old game like Diablo II that isn't at all likely to be ported, ever, it's an "okay" thing. (If it gets people onto Linux by providing a way to play select things, it's serving it's real purpose. If you're using it to play new stuff, you have to ask yourself which is more important... Something I've already done. I don't DO WINE for that stuff. If it's not being evaled for porting, it's not on a machine at all, WINE or VirtualBox XP. If it's not Linux and it's not on Wii or PS3, it doesn't get bought by myself or others on my behalf- period.)
That's ALL I've EVER said. If you want to read more into it, that's fine- just please don't be putting words into my mouth.
Last edited by Svartalf; 06-05-2009 at 06:02 PM.
06-05-2009, 05:51 PM
That will only work if you have accurate stats that show they're leaving 25% or more of the potential market lying on the floor.
Originally Posted by rah_
By the way, we DID have a AAA title that was effectively simultaneously released. It was delayed for Linux a couple of weeks because of a problem with customs on the packaging that was ordered for the first batch of the things. People didn't wait and bought the Windows version, which counted as a WINDOWS sale, and then "converted" it to Linux use- which didn't count for a Linux version. The only Linux sales for this AAA title counted in the low hundreds.
What you say isn't going to happen the way you think it will. And WINE stats won't budge things any more than the figures we bandy about (which are on the low side in my opinion, but...).