Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: Unreal Tournament 3 Linux Server Is Out!

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,116

    Default Unreal Tournament 3 Linux Server Is Out!

    Phoronix: Unreal Tournament 3 Linux Server Is Out!

    It's over a month late, but today Ryan Gordon has released the Unreal Tournament 3 Linux server. This server doesn't require the retail DVD, but is 1.6GB in size.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NjI1MQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    370

    Default

    they should prioritize the client some more.. the server do me no good

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Will there be client at all?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    16

    Default Yay!

    I'm so happy for all the windows users that have had the privilege to play this game since early November, that they can finally play on stable Linux servers!

    HOORAH!

    ^ This is sarcasm.

    The server got precedence over the client. Epic has failed us.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Oh... GEEZ.


    People. C'mon now and get on the same page here. The only reason that the client didn't go out yet is that Ryan's having to do more work on fixing the licensing imbroglio that he's tapdancing around to get the game (And the UT3 ENGINE) out the door for us.

    They didn't fail us- they had it lined up for release and then hit an 11th hour snag.

    Seriously, people, will you STOP going on like this when there's some little glitch? Until it becomes dead clear, either by extreme delays (more than a couple of weeks or months...we're talking year plus delays...) or by an OFFICIAL statement from the studio or publisher that they're not going to do a Linux version, if they made an OFFICIAL statement that they're going to do so (And Epic has done this for UT3... So has Id for Rage and IdTech 5...) then you need to take them at their word until they prove not worth that.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    370

    Default

    the level of information they are giving is simply insuffecient.

    and no matter the reason, they have failed us.

    they could have simply stated what the problem was, and then perhaps focusing abit more on fixing it, than producing a server for linux.

    its really quite simple, to resolve licensing issues you do the following
    1: identify exactly what stuff theres problems with
    2: ask the people holding the rights, if they will license under <insert terms epic wants> or not, and that they have 1 week to say yes or no.
    3(if yes): continue on your way, with 1-2 weeks delay
    4(if no): either stop the project right there, and issue the statement, or rewrite it, and STILL issue statement about what is needed to be done, and an expected timeframe.

    this kindof useless level of information can only be labelled by one label: "FAIL"

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Redeeman View Post
    the level of information they are giving is simply insuffecient.

    and no matter the reason, they have failed us.

    they could have simply stated what the problem was, and then perhaps focusing abit more on fixing it, than producing a server for linux.
    Sorry, if it's something covered under Non-Disclosure, no they CAN'T tell us. And, I suspect that's what's going on- that's par for the course in the game industry.

    It works in the way you describe in the FREE and OPEN SOURCE communities- it does no such thing in their world. You can't even begin to ask them to operate outside of what they're able to do.

    Give it a rest. Really.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Mexico City, Mexico
    Posts
    900

    Default

    Darn... At least the server means that the engine (at least partially) has already been ported to Linux, which means that the remaining coding should be in its way to delivery (hopefully).

    I fully understand what you are trying to say, Svartalf, the same was the situation (and I think still is) for ATi/AMD's Beta program. You get to download the driver, test it, give feedback on it, but not to comment to the Linux community at large. That's how NDA's work, you agreed to be bound by those terms. Epic (just like Svartalf said) has agreed to said terms of one or rather several NDAs, which cause them to simply be unable to even tell their audience what's going on. I believe that was in part the reason why they didn't use much third party IP in their past generation games (for instance, why they did develop an in-house physics engine and not go with Havok), I guess this time around things got messier if they wanted to keep all-in-house. But I can only do that, guess. Until they can actually comment on the status, that's what we are able to do. We all know the proprietary software world sucks for things like these, but hey! Epic is being kind enough to grant us a Linux version, even if delayed, having into account the "peculiarities" of our community.

    Should they have delayed the Windows version so one massive "unified" version was out? Probably was the "right thing to do", but maybe it wasn't their call either (but rather the publisher's, and since Linux releases usually fall outside the scope of the publishers... That means a big "sorry, Linux")

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    197

    Default

    Yes Yes Yes ;-)

    I have my UT3 here waiting for beautiful linux client ;-) It would be nice if we could see any alpha/beta before new year, but thats too soon i think :/

  10. #10

    Default

    Just got this from Ryan:

    Subject: Middleware...


    ...so did you figure out what got removed from ut3 yet?

    --ryan.

    Anyone bother investigating the server file yet? I haven't had the time yet.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •