This thread is continuing here: http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22495
In respect to the PS3 Orange Box port, this was apparently (by Valve's own admission), and if you've ever actually played it (noticeably), a bad 'hacky' port by EA - and they apparently never shared the code with Valve (one of many reasons why Valve aren't updating it). Another point here is that EA would have been highly likely to have used the PS3's native libgcm, rather than its apparently no-too-good OpenGL ES implementation. The reason for the Xbox 360 port being so much better was because Valve were able to make the port themselves, precisely because it supported D3D.
And in respect to changing the Steam rendering engine from IE to WebKit - well obviously it's going to be 1000% better performance and reliability wise, but Valve showed that their main motivation was obviously portability, when they announced the Mac port only a few weeks after the Steam beta was introduced.
And I quote the words of Valves's Director of Steam Development, from Valve's own press release on the announcement of OS X support - "The inclusion of WebKit into Steam, and of OpenGL into Source gives us a lot of flexibility in how we move these technologies forward.".
And yes, hardware support is still a problem, but *if* Valve were to start the ball rolling, then this would also have a trickle down effect of putting a lot more pressure one hardware manufacturers to release better drivers. Why does Broadcom now produce relatively-decent driver solutions for Linux? Because when Dell first formed their partnership with Canonical to sell Ubuntu machines, Dell put the pressure on Broadcom to produce some decent drivers.
Anyway - in a few hours, we'll see whether the earliest chance for Valve to announce Linux support comes to pass...
There was one game accidentally listed on steam as linux. The games own developer admitted this was a mistake. It happens. There have been many places and times where this has happened on the web. Heck I even remember a mousepad having minimum system specifications on Amazon once.
- All the clues we've had over the years we've had over the years (including those announced on Phoronix) - including the job listing, the Linux Steam client libraries in the Left 4 Dead demo, and most recently, if I remember correctly, the page for some random game on Steam (maybe L4D2, can't remember) temporarily listed Linux as a supported OS.
Most macs from the intel era have a discreet graphics solutions. In fact when they first came out with the iMac the Intel GPU was only available on the 17" which was only sold to educational customers. The Mac Mini had a Intel IGP as well but the number of sales of them compared to a imac are extremely small (think low single digits) because by the time people started adding the monitor/keyboard/mouse/ram/etc they were back up the the price of an iMac with more capable abilities then you could ever spec out a Mac Mini with. The only real seller with Intel IGP's that sold very well were the Macbooks. All and all Intel IGP's simply doesn't have the dominance in Apple machines like they do in PC's and most Apples do have a discreet solution. (in PowerPC days they were all discreet solutions).
- While there are almost certainly more Macs in desktop use than Linux, what people don't seem to be considering is that, until recently, most of Apple's desktops and laptops have been sold with Intel GPUs, which are pretty much incapable of rendering most of Valve's games correctly. By contrast, Linux will have access to the existing Windows hardware ecosystem (although arguably, Nvidia cards will still perform better at the moment).
Different names, same shit. Although linux is a bit ehm... dynamic
yah... developers are way better... *drag* *play* *pew pew visual studio*99.99% of gamers have no idea how to use an OS beyond *click* *click* *drag* *play* *pew pew crisys*.
most developers these days don't know assembly or how a OS is build and still deliver excellent stuff... Gamers know how to use forums and hack games... no problem.
Look, you got me wrong. I'm not arguing against. I'm arguing that, given what I've seen and the state of the economy, there's a very slim chance anybody, including Valve, will risk developing for what is from their pov an insignificant platform.
I mean, the only reason I keep Windows on one of my home machines is to play some games from time to time. I can easily test all my cross platform clients in a virtual machine, but I can't play games in the virtual machine.
If Valve ports the Orange Box to Linux I'd buy a dozen and use make them gifts. I purchased Loki's stuff (Alpha Centauri, Heroes 3, Quake 3 and the like ) 4-5 each. They make nice presents for dev team members...
Since everybody already knows about Portal 2, if there is indeed a BIG announcement to be made by Valve (and not just marketing hype) then it has to be either HL2EP3 or some unknown title. Remember that they said they are working on something that is a new ip.
I assure you legal people know the ins and outs of *GPL and the like far better than you or me. They usually advise against it. Remember that most of what makes Google 'Google' is closed source.
ID has shown that that they can make really cool real time rendering engines. That's about it. Yes, they have Linux builds but then, if it would be so easy, with a AAA super optimized graphics engine already working on Linux, why is it that companies don't make cross platform games using ID's engine? Maybe because the rest of it, from rendering engine to game engine is utterly missing? If you gonna tell your managers and sponsors that there are more sound APIs on Linux than MBA degrees in their resumes they'll bury your Linux target on spot. Again, I'm not ranting out of my arse, I'm talking from experience.
For example, I managed to stall for a year and a half a mandatory management course but they finally had me take it. It was a "thorough" course that laster 6 month and was taken at a prestigious university. You have to understand they actually teach people that open source is bad and you have to be careful and so and so. There was a guy from Sony who was some sort of product manager for PS3 stuff. He excelled at pointing out the evils and traps of open source. And this is not 'one bad apple', pick a book geared toward business-management people and start reading. I'll make a compilation of books that are required reading for software management courses and post it here. Read them and tell me the people who will graduate learning this stuff, and moving on to lead development teams will ok ports to Linux.
I was at a wedding and there were a lot of lawyers, friends of the bride, and they were chatting and two of them, who were specialized in software related issues were talking about 'the terror of open source' that ravages their clients...
I mean it's really cool on slashdot and phoronix, and it may seem crowded now and then, but the 'real world out there' isn't an inch friendlier to foss. Yeah, if they can take it for free and wash their hands, but otherwise...
2nd) Usually it's Game Engine SDK task to support multi-platform(there is plenty cross platform engines/toolchains(PC&XBOX&PS) at 100k$+ cost but each platform add additional cost)
3rd) Again there very few companies that develop&maintain own large scale game engines.
Also regarding consoles i little displeased with my PS3 console and one of reasons why i turned down offer to buy XBOX360. All i see a few console specific titles and a lot of clones or PC sequels. Console disk cost very high is look like major companies try to raise profit in game industry, but without innovations.
If Valve release Linux Steam. I will drop $1000 on games the day it's announced. (Or the next payday after.)
The point was that Linux is very dynamic and 'multicultural'. Most companies get a GSDK that works on Win/Xbox (pretty much the same sing, from the M$ provided APIs) and PS3 and, maybe Wii. The thing is there is ONE standard API per platform. You won't test with a gazillion sound systems. The state of ATI's and NVidia's binary blobs leaves much to be desired, compared to their 'professional' cousins (firegl and quadro). We had OpenGL/SL conformance and performance test batches and they workd fine on the 'pro' drivers on 'pro' cards but failed there and there on gaming cards and since all the additional costs from a radeon to a firegl or geforce to quadro is in the drivers (hardware is identical) that tells me that their 'consumer' blobs are badly designed and implemented, at least on Linux.
I mean, I don't want to make a big deal out of it, no show-stoppers, products work fine and we always had fixes, but it shows the weaknes of the platform. NVidia provides fairly stable drivers, and we can expect that with ATI and Creative open sourcing their stuff, we'll have non-binary, quality drivers for audio and video. But then, what about ALSA, Jack, Pulse and the myriad of other sound systems? I don't think any major developer will support all, or at least the hand full of the most important ones.
Again, I'm not arguing against it, I'm just saying that it will be quite a while until both the software (drivers and such) and the mentality (on part of the big names in the gaming industry) will catch up.
I'd rather see them contributing to wine and making their games work. For example, I can almost play Civ4 in wine. I actually played for 2 hours mp until it crashed, even longer in sp.